English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 88295/117812 (75%)
Visitors : 23405339      Online Users : 129
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/123084

    Title: SNTV的省思:幣端肇因或是代罪羔羊?
    Reconsidering the SNTV: Pandora's Box or Scapegoat?
    Authors: 吳重禮
    Wu, Chung-Li
    Contributors: 問題與研究
    Keywords: 複數選區單記非讓渡投票制;政黨政治;派系政治;選舉動員
    SNTV;party politics;factional politics;electoral mobilization
    Date: 2002-05
    Issue Date: 2019-04-18 14:12:34 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 邇來,我國現行民意代表選舉所採行的SNTV制度遭致諸多的批評。抨擊SNTV之理由甚多,大體可歸納為:其一,刺激極端意識形態的發展;其二,裨益派系政治的運作;其三,弱化政黨競爭的分際;其四,形成以候選人為中心的選戰型態;其五,助長賄選風氣與黑金政治。再者,鼓吹儘速改革SNTV制度者指出,韓國、日本等國已分別改棄該項選舉制度,改採其他類型選舉方式,目前僅我國仍繼續採用之,故宜儘早革除之。依筆者之見,得票率與席次率之間的「比例性」(proportionality)即是諸多研究之所以抨擊SNTV制度的主要理由。值得深思的問題是,若干研究肯定SNTV制度的理由,亦是基於「比例性」的考量。綜觀之,對於SNTV制度的評價,貶在於「比例性」,褒亦在於「比例性」,端賴其觀察角度而異。經由分析檢證相關論述與資料,筆者對於這些批判觀點均持保留的態度。本文以為,在實際政治運作過程中,「非正式結構」與「個人」兩相互糾結產生的力量,往往凌駕於「制度」所發揮的效應。換言之,假如認為改革選舉制度,必能幣絕風清,恐將是過於樂觀評估。
    The system of multiple constituencies with a single non-transferable vote (SNTV) is used for legislative election in Taiwan. The use of the SNTV has been controversial. Critics charge it with such flaws as: 1) stimulating the development of extreme ideology; 2) encouraging the formation of factional politics; 3) weakening the border over the border over the competition between political parties; 4) facilitating candidate-centered electoral politics; and 5) fostering the vote buying and “black-and-gold” problem. Furthermore, those advocating the reform of SNTV point our that Korea and Japan have abandoned the system and adopted others; nowadays only Taiwan still adopts the SNTV. In this author’s opinion, the electoral proportionality between vote shares and seat shares is the main reason why the SNTV is criticized. What needs to be thought through is that some research supporting the SNTV are also based on proportionality. In short, the criticism on SNTV lies in the proportionality and the appreciation of SNTV lies in the proportionality as well. By analyzing relevant data, I hold that these criticisms are unconvincing. The interaction between “informal structure” and individuals often generated forces that rendered formal institutions ineffective. It might be too optimistic to expect that the reform of electoral system will solve any political problems.
    Relation: 問題與研究, 41(3), 45-60
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[問題與研究 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    358.pdf1079KbAdobe PDF18View/Open

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback