:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:憲政規則與理性選擇:臺灣少數政府的存續(2000~2008)
書刊名:社會科學論叢
作者:李俊達 引用關係
作者(外文):Lee, Chun-ta
出版日期:2011
卷期:5:2
頁次:頁2-32
主題關鍵詞:倒閣不信任案少數政府政府存續理性選擇Legislative vote of non-confidenceMinority governmentGovernment survivalRational choice
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:176
  • 點閱點閱:58
2000年政黨輪替後,開啟台灣長達八年的民進黨少數政府時期。一般而言,政府的「成立」與「存續」是兩個不同的課題,因為除典型總統制之外,其他憲政體制下的行政部門在成立後隨時都有可能面臨議會的不信任,遭受倒閣去職。顯然地,由於未能「保證」獲得議會多數支持,少數政府在成立之後的存續基礎最為薄弱,隨時可能基於議會多數的不信任案而終結。就台灣的情況而言,少數政府的成立主要為憲法增修條文第三條第一項「總統行使行政院院長任命權」所致,但少數政府的存續則是受到其他與倒閣相關的憲法規定影響。本文將立基Bergman所提出「政府成立」的憲政規則概念,延伸為「政府解散」的憲政規則,並結合Strom提出的在野政黨理性選擇觀點,試圖解釋台灣的少數政府存續現象,認為民進黨少數政府的存續乃是在野政黨針對憲法「倒閣」規定所做的理性選擇。
After the government change over in at 2000, the power over the executive department was gained by President Chen Shui-bian and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), whose presence in the Legislative Yuan never became a majority until 2008. Generally speaking, there are distinctions between ”formation” and ”survival” of a government. Excluding presidential systems, all executive departments can be potentially dismissed by submitting act from a legislative non-confidence vote in any constitutional regime. A minority government, therefore is pretty fragile due to the lack of ”trust” from parliament as a supporting foundation. In Taiwan's case, the DPP minority government is primarily based on the Additional Article § 3.1. This article combines Bergman's standpoint of negative constitutional rules and Strom's perspective on opposition rational choice and tries to clarify the survival of DPP minority government from the opposite majority's rational considerations.
期刊論文
1.Bergman, Torbjörn(1993)。Formation Rules and Minority Governments。European Journal of Political Research,23(1),55-66。  new window
2.Cheibub, Jose Antonio、Przeworski, Adam、Saiegh, Sebastian M(2004)。Government Coalitions and Legislative Success under Presidentialism and Parliamentarism。British Journal of Political Science,34(4),565-587。  new window
3.周陽山(20010600)。半總統制的考驗:臺灣的政黨政治與權力運作。華岡社科學報,15,15-22。  延伸查詢new window
4.陳敦源(20000400)。人為何投票?--理性選擇觀點的緣起與發展。民意研究季刊,212,31-64。  延伸查詢new window
5.張峻豪、徐正戎(20070300)。閣揆角色的受限或突破:政黨輪替後我國行政院院長與總統互動之研究。臺灣民主季刊,4(1),51-108。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.盛治仁(20030900)。理性抉擇理論在政治學運用之探討。東吳政治學報,17,21-51。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.Duverger, Maurice(1980)。A New Political System Model: Semi-Presidential Government。European Journal of Political Research,8(2),165-187。  new window
8.黃秀端(20031200)。少數政府在國會的困境。臺灣政治學刊,7(2),3-49。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.黃德福(20001200)。少數政府與責任政治:臺灣「半總統制」之下的政黨競爭。問題與研究,39(12),1-24。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.沈有忠(20050300)。制度制約下的行政與立法關係:以我國九七憲改後的憲政運作為例。政治科學論叢,23,27-60。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.陳宏銘(20071200)。臺灣半總統制下「少數政府」的存續:2000~2004。東吳政治學報,25(4),1-64。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.周育仁(2001)。聯合政府的憲政意涵。國家政策論壇,1(3),163-165。  延伸查詢new window
13.周育仁(2006)。新内閣之困境與挑戰。台灣民主季刊,3(1),105-110。  延伸查詢new window
14.張台麟(2001)。從法國共治經驗看我國未來聯合政府之走向。國家政策論壇,1(5),58-63。  延伸查詢new window
15.蕭文生(2001)。自法律觀點論國會改選後的政府組成。新世紀智庫論壇,15,73-81。  延伸查詢new window
16.蘇子喬(2002)。我國當前憲政體制中總統、行政院院長與立法院之三角關係:應然面與實然面之探討。憲政時代,27(3),84-119。  延伸查詢new window
17.陳俊明(2001)。民進黨的政黨關係初探。國家政策論壇,1(3),39-46。  延伸查詢new window
18.楊日青(2000)。政府體制、選舉制度、政黨制度與内閣組合的關係。新野論壇,3,1-14。  延伸查詢new window
19.Green-Pedersen, Christoffer.(2001)。Minority Government and Party Politics: The Political and Institutional Background to the 'Danish Miracle'。Journal of Public Policy,21(1),53-70。  new window
20.Herman, Valentine M.、John Pope.(1973)。Minority Government in Western Democracies。British Journal of Political Science,3(2),191-212。  new window
21.Diermerer, Daniel, Hulya Eraslan、Antonio Merlo.(2002)。Coalition Governments and Comparative Constitutional Design。European Economic Review,46(4/5),893-907。  new window
22.Elgie, Robert、Moshe Maor.(1992)。Accounting for the Survival of Minority Government: An Examination of the French Case, 1988-1991。West European Politics,15(3),57-74。  new window
23.Taylor, Michael、Michael Laver.(1973)。Government Coalition in Western Europe。European Journal of Political Research,1(3),205-248。  new window
24.Bergman, Torbjom.(1993)。Constitutional Design and Government Formation: The Expected Consequences of Negative Parliamentarism。Scandinavian Political Studies,16(4),285-304。  new window
25.Taylor, Michael、Herman, Valentine M.(1971)。Party Systems and Government Stability。American Political Science Review,65(1),28-37。  new window
圖書
1.Lijphart, Arend(1998)。Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries。New Haven:Yale University Press。  new window
2.Beyme, Klaus Von(1985)。Political Parties in Western Democracies。Political Parties in Western Democracies。United Kingdom:Palgrave。  new window
3.Luebbert, Gregory M.(1986)。Comparative Democracy: Policymaking and Governing Coalitions in Europe and Israel。Columbia University Press。  new window
4.陳陽德、衛芷言(1997)。中華民國憲法動態新論。臺北:五南。  延伸查詢new window
5.Dodd, Lawrence C.(1976)。Coalitions in Parliamentary Government。Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton University Press。  new window
6.Laver, Michael、Shepsle, Kenneth A.(1996)。Making and Breaking Governments: Cabinets and Legislatures in Parliamentary Democracies。Cambridge University Press。  new window
7.Sartori, Giovanni(1976)。Parties and Party Systems。Cambridge University Press。  new window
8.隋杜卿(200103)。中華民國的憲政工程:以雙首長制為中心的探討。臺北:韋伯文化。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.Strom, Kaare(1990)。Minority Government and Majority Rule。Cambridge:Cambridge University Press。  new window
10.呂炳寬、徐正戎(20050000)。半總統制的理論與實際。臺北:鼎茂圖書。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.林佳龍(2001)。總統大選與政黨重組。台灣的危機與轉機。台北。  延伸查詢new window
12.葉家興、Poundstone, William(2007)。賽局理論與數學天才馮紐曼的故事。台北。  延伸查詢new window
13.高永光(2001)。從博弈理論分析聯合政府。聯合政府台灣民主體制的新選擇?。台北。  延伸查詢new window
14.Baylis, Thomas A.(1989)。Governing by Committee。New York。  new window
15.Hagan, Joe D.(1993)。Political Opposition and Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective。Boulder, CO:Lynne Rienner。  new window
16.Kim, Byung-Kook.(2000)。Party Politics in South Korea’s Democracy: The Crisis of Success。Institutional Reform and Democratic Consolidation in Korea。Stanford, CA。  new window
17.Pridham, Geoffrey.(1986)。Coalitional Behaviour in Theory and Practice: An Inductive Model for Western Europe。New York。  new window
單篇論文
1.詹中原(20060531)。全球治理下國家公共政策的影響指標:理性選擇制度論的觀點,http://www.npf.org.tw/particle-2417-2.html。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.(2000)。政院宣布停建核四,朝野緊張升高。  延伸查詢new window
2.中國時報民意調查組(2006)。三成六反對倒閣,六成九肯定溫和路線。  延伸查詢new window
3.李鴻典(2006)。假倒閣真唬弄,馬再吃宋豆腐,http://www.newtaiwan.com.tw/bulletinview.jsp?bulletimd=64398, 20100928。  延伸查詢new window
4.陳明旺,秦蕙媛,李淑華(2006)。藍不倒閣,伺機彈劾扁。  延伸查詢new window
5.劉寶傑(2000)。組閣?李遠哲鬆ロ,會仔細想想。  延伸查詢new window
6.林晨柏,徐孝慈(2000)。再度強調全民政府,陳水扁:國民黨不能整碗要捧去。  延伸查詢new window
7.施曉光等(2006)。路線分歧:藍擬推三罷,橘要倒閣。  延伸查詢new window
8.高永光(2000)。罷免核四公投提前登場,http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/NS/089/C/Ns-c-089-034.htm, 20100928。  new window
9.朱衛東(2003)。核四風暴的可能結局與影響,http://big5.huaxia.com/2003617/00003354.html, 20100928。  延伸查詢new window
10.楊孟瑜(2000)。台行政院長宣布停建核四,http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_990000/newsid_994000/994018.stm, 20101003。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE