Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0702116-175537 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0702116-175537
論文名稱
Title
美國總統否決權之研究
The Research on the American President's Veto Power
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
152
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2016-06-08
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2016-08-02
關鍵字
Keywords
總統否決權、行政立法關係、總統制、憲政改造、國會改革、比較憲政
Parliament Reform, Constitution Reconstruciton, Comparative Constitution, Presidents' Veto Power, Relations between Administrative and Legisletive, Presidential Regime
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5661 次,被下載 0
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5661 times, has been downloaded 0 times.
中文摘要
本文主研究美國總統否決權之憲政學理論基礎,與其實務行政與立法運作之 關係。文中探討三權分立之淵源與美國總統否決權之實踐,並加以針對美英日法 案例作進一步之「行政–立法」比較分析,及從尼克森總統(President Nixon)時期 至克林頓總統(PresidentClinton)時期做個案剖析比較。最後對台灣國會改革與憲政 改造提出建議,同時研究中發現美國總統否決權與法國總統公投權同為制衡國會專擅所享有之特別權力,實值參考。
Abstract
Thisdissertation studies mainly the basic theory of Science Constitution of
vetopower of the Presidents of United States of America, and it’s practice onmovement relations between the administrative and the legislative. The contentof dissertation discuss the origin for Power Separation and the establishmentof Presidents’ veto power in USA, and goes further for case study on analysis comparisonon the administrative and the legislative from America, UK, Japan and France,in the meantime do the comparative analysis of cases on periods from PresidentNixon to President Clinton USA. Finally give suggestions on Parliament reform and ConstitutionReconstruction on Taiwan, and discover during research that AmericanPresidents’ veto power and French Presidents’ referendum power are samespecific authority for checking over dictatorship from Parliaments. It isworthy to have reference.
目次 Table of Contents
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 研究方法與研究途徑 21
第三節 否決權理論溯源與實證研究之文獻回顧 31
第四節研究限制與章節安排 39
第二章 三權分立淵源與美國總統否決權實踐之研究 41
第ㄧ節、分權與行政否決權之淵源 41
第二節 行政否決權的淵源 45
第三節否決權實踐的經驗發現 51
第三章 主要术主國家的「行政—立法」比較分析:美、英、日、法的比較 61
第一節美國國會與總統的憲政關係 61
第二節 日本、英國的國會制度 67
第四章 美國個案研究 I:尼克森時期 77
第一節 尼克森與入主白宮前的「越戰」泥沼 77
第二節尼克森時期的「分治」與否決權使用的個案分析 85
第三節「戰爭權力法」 93
第五章 美國個案研究 II:從克林頓時期的「同治」到「分治」 97
第一節 克林頓的「到白宮之路」 97
第二節 從白宮國會「同治」到「分治」 100
第三節 克林頓否決權的使用與運用 102
第四節克林頓否決政治的方法與理論 105
第五節 克林頓重要否決案概述與「台灣安全加強法案」 112
第六章 結論:否決權與台灣的憲政改造 117
第一節 台灣國會改革與憲政改造 117
第二節 否決權:尊重少數、妥協與細議术主的體現 121
第三節 研究發現 127
參考文獻(Bibliography) 143
參考文獻 References
一、中文部分

尹德瀚等譯,2004,<我的人生—柯林頓回憶錄>,台北: 時報文化出版社。
何思因主編,1994,<美國>,台北:國立政治大學國際關係研究中心中文叢書系列。 李昌麟,2013,〈比較公术投票制度〉,台北:五南圖書。 李奕廷、吳重禮,2013,<美國總統條項否決權的爭議:聯邦 最高法院 Clinton
v. City of New York 一案之判決及其影響>,《政治學報》,第 55 期,頁 1-26。 呂亞力,1985,<政治學>,台北:三术書局。
林水卲,2004,<修憲後我國國會功能及其未來走向>,《開南管理學院通識研究集 刊》,第 5 期,頁 83-99。
林水波,2004,<公投復議與制度反省>,《立法院院聞》,第 32 卷第 10 期,頁
11-24。
林秀幸主編,2016,〈照破太陽花運動的振幅、縱深與視域〉,台北:左岸 文化。
吳玉山,2011,<半總統制:全球發展與研究議程>,《政 治科學論叢》,第 47 期, 頁 1-32。
吳重禮,1998,<「分立性政府」與「一致性政府」體制運作之比較與評析>,《政治科 學論叢》,第 9 期,頁 61-90。
徐札戎、呂炳寬,2002,<九七憲改後的憲政運作>,《問題與研究》,第 41 期 第 1 卷,頁 1-24。
陳滄海,1999,<憲政改革與政治權力 — ㄧ九九七憲改的例證>,台北:五南。
陳宏銘,2012,<半總統制下總統的法案推動與立法影響力:馬英九總統執政時期的研 究>,《東吳政治學報》,第 30 卷 第 2 期,頁 1-70。
盛杏湲,2003,<立法機關與行政機關在立法過程中的影響力:一致政府與分立政府的比較
>,行政院國科會研究計畫報告。計畫編號:NSC90-24-H-004-029。
湯德宗,1986,<三權憲法、四權政府與立法否決權—美國聯邦最高法院 INS v.
Chadha 案評釋>,《美國研究》,第 16 卷第 2 期,頁 27-99。
黃秀端,2003,<少數政府在國會的困境>,《台灣政治學 刊》,第 7 卷,第 2
期,頁 3-49。
楊婉瑩,<一致性到分立性政府的政黨合作與衝突—以第四屆立法院為例>,《東吳政治 學報》,第 16 期,頁 47-91。
葛永光,2015,<總統否決權與覆議制度之研究:美、法、 中之經驗>,《國家政策研究 基金會》,頁 1-6。
劉嘉甯,法國憲政共治之研究,〈台北:台灣商務印書館,1990〉。

二、英文部分
(一)Books
Aldrich, John H. 2015. “Did Hamilton, Jefferson, and Madison “Cause” the U.S.
Government Shutdown? The Institutional Path from an Eighteen Century Republic to a Twenty-first Century Democracy.” Perspectives on Politics. March, 13(1):7-23.
——. 2011. Why Parties? A Second Look. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
——. 2005. “The Election of 1800: The Consequences of the First Change in Party Control.” In Establishing Congress: The Removal to Washington, D.C., and the Election of 1800, ed. Kenneth R. Bowling and Donald R. Kennon. Athens: Ohio University Press.
Binder, Sara A. 2003. Stalemate: Causes and Consequences of Legislative Gridlock.Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
——. 1999. “The Dynamics of Legislative Gridlock, 1947-96.” American Political Science
Review 93(3): 519-33.
——. 1997. Minority Rights, Majority Rule: partisanship and the Development of Congress. Cambridge University Press.
Bond, Jon, and Richard Fleisher, 1990. The President in the Legislative Arena Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Brady, David, and Craig Volden. 1998. Revolving Gridlock: Politics and Policy from Carter to Clinton. Colorado: Westview Press.
Carmines, Edward G., and James A. Stimson. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Copeland, David W. 1983. “Why Presidents Veto Legislation.” The Journal of Politics. August, 45(3): 696-710.
Dahl, Robert A. 1981. Democracy in the United States. 4th Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Dion, Douglas. 1997. Turning the Legislative Thumbscrew: Minority Rights and Procedural Change in Legislative Politics. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
Dodd, Lawrence C., and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, eds. 1993. Congress Reconsidered. 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
——. 2001. Congress Reconsidered. 7th ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Dogan, Mattei, and Dominique Pelassy. 1984. How to Compare Nations: Strategies in Comparative Politics. New Jersey: Chatham House Publishers, Inc.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Edwards, George C. 1989. At the Margins: Presidential Leadership of Congress. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Fiorina, Morris. 1996. Divided Government. 2nd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
——.1991a. Divided Government in the States. In The Politics of Divided Government, edited by Gary W. Cox and Samuel Kernell. Boulder Press: Westview Press.
——.1991b. Elections and the Economy in the 1980s: Short-and Long-Term Effects. In Politics and Economics in the Eighties, edited by Alberto Alesina and Geoffrey Carliner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Frenzel, Bill. 1995. The System Is Self-Correcting. In Back to Gridlock? Governance in the Clinton Years, edited by James L. Sundquist. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books. Grenville, John A. S. 1994. A History of the World in the Twentieth Century.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kissinger, Henry. 2011. On China. New York: the Penguin Press.
Huntington, Samuel P. 1968. Political Order in Changing Society. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Jacobson, Gary C., 2000. Party Polarization in National Politics: The Electoral Connection. In Polarized Politics, edited by Jon R. Bond and Richard. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Jones, Charles O. 1994. The Presidency in a Separated System. Brooking Institution Press.
——.1995. “A Way of Life and Law.” American Political Science Review 89(1):1-9.
Krehbiel, Keith. 2010. Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mann, Thomas E, and Norman J. Ornstein. 2013. It’s Even Worse than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism.
Basic Books.
Mason, E. C. 1890. The Veto Power: Its Origin, Development and Foundation in the Government of the United States. Boston: Harvard Historical Monographs, No. 1.
Mayhew, David R. 1991. Divided We Govern. New Haven: Yale University Press. Nixon, Richard . The Memoirs of Richard Nixon. New York: A Filmways Company.
Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 1993. Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History. New York: Harper Colllins College Publishers.
Peterson, Mark. 1990. Legislating Together: The White House and Capitol Hill from Eisenhower to Reagan. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1990.
Oppenheimer, Bruce I. 1996. The Importance of elections in a Strong Congressional Party Era. In Do Elections Matter? 3rd ed., edited by Benjamin Ginsberg and Alan Stone.
Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.
Quirk, Paul J.,and Bruce Nesmith. 1998. Divided Government and Policy Making: Negotiating the Laws. In The Presidency and the Political System. 5th ed., edited by Michael Nelson. Washington D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Ranney, Austin. 2001. Governing: An Introduction to Political Science. 8th Edition. New Jersey: Upper Saddle River.
Rieselbach, Leroy. 1973. Congressional Politics. McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Sabine, George, and Thomas L. Thorson. 1973. A History of Political Theory. 4th ed. Hinsdale, Illinois: Dryden Press.
Samuels, David and Mathew Shugart. 2010. Presidents, Prime Ministers, and Political Parties. Cambridge University Press.
Sartori, Giovanni. Theory of Democracy Revisited, Part I. 1987. New Jersey, Chatham House Publishers, INC.
Schickler, Eric. 2001. Disjointed Pluralism: Institutional Innovation and the Development of the U.S Congress. Princeton University Press.
Sinclair, Barbara. 1989. The Transformation of the Senate. Baltimore, Maryland: The John Hopkins University Press.
Skocpol, Theda, and Morris P. Fiorina, eds. 1999. Civic Engagement in American Democracy. Brookings institution Press.
Thach, Charles C. 1922. The Creation of the Presidency, 1775-1789: A Study in Constitutional History. Baltimore, Maryland: The John Hopkins University Press.
Tilly, Charles. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. Random House Press.
——. 1984. Big Structures, Large Processes, and Huge Comparisons. The Russell Sage Foundation.
Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton University Press.
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Massachusetts: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company.
Wildavsky, William B. 1988. The New Politics of the Budget Process. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman.

(二) Journal Articles

Baron, David, and John Ferejohn. 1989. “Bargaining in Legislatures.” American Political Science Review 83(4): 1181-1206.
Coleman, John J. 1999. “ Unified Government, Divided Government, and Party Responsiveness,” American Political Science Review. December 93(4): 821-35.
Dahl, Robert A. 1991. “Democracy, Majority Rule, and Gorbachev’s Referendum .” Fall: 491-96.
Duverger, Maruice. 1980. “ A New Political System Model: Semi-Presidential Government.” European Journal of Political Research 8(2): 165-87.
Edwards III, George C., Andrew Barrett, and Jeffrey Peake. 1997. “The Legislative
Impact of Divided Government.” American Journal of Political Science. April 41: 545-63.
Ericson, Robert S. 1989. Why the Democrats Lose Presidential Elections: Toward a Theory of Optimal Loss. Political Science and Politics 21(1):30-35.
——. 1990. Roll Calls, Reputation, and Representation in the US Senate. Legislative Studies Quarterly 15:630.
Goodin, Robert E. 1996. “Institutionalizing the public Interest: The Defense of Deadlock and Beyond,” American Political Science Review. June 90: 331-343.
Howell, William, Scott Adler, Charles Cameron, and Charles Riemann. 2000 “Divided Government and the Legislative Productivity of Congress, 1945-94.” Legislative Studies Quarterly. May 25: 285-312.
Kelly, Sean Q. 1993. “Divided We Govern? A Reassessment: The Effect of Unified vs. Divided Government” Polity. Spring 25: 475-84.
Kiew, D. Roderick, and Mathew D. McCubbins. 1988. “Presidential Influence on Congressional Appropriations Decisions.” American Journal of Political Science. August 32(3): 713-36.
Lee, Jong R. 1975. “Presidential Vetoes from Washington to Nixon.” Journal of Politics 37: 522-546.
MacKuen, Michael B. 1983.“Political Drama, Economic Condition, and the Dynamics of
Presidential Popularity.” American Journal of Political Science. May, 27: 165-92.
Ostrom, Charles W. and Dennis M. Simon. 1985. “Promise and Performance: A Dynamic Model of Presidential Popularity,” American Political Science Review. June 79: 334-58.
Parker, Glenn R., and Roger H. Davison. 1979. “Why Do Americans Love Their Congressmen So Much More Than Their Congress?” Legislative Studies Quarterly. February 4: 53-61.
Rohde, David., and Dennis M. Simon. 1985. “Presidential Vetoes and Congressional Response: A Study of Institutional Conflict.” American Journal of Political Science. August, 29(3): 397-427.
Sundquist, James.1988-1989. “Needed: A Political Theory for the New Era of Coalition Government in the United States.” Political Science Quarterly. Winter 103: 613-635.
Thorson, Gregory. 1998. “Divided Government and the Passage of Partisan Legislation, 1947-1990.” Political Research Quarterly. 51: 751-64.
Towle, Katherine A. 1937. “The Presidential Veto Since 1899.” American Political Science Review 31: 51-56.
Watson, Richard A. 1993. Presidential Vetoes and Public Policy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

二、法文部分
(一)Books

Capitant R.: Démocratie et participation politique ( Paris: Bordas, 1972).
Champagne G: du Droit constitutionnel, 2vol.( Paris :GualinoLextenso Editions, 2009).
Duverger M.:Le système politique français: Droit constitutionnel et systèmes politiques( Paris, PUF, 1985).

(二) Journal Articles and documents

Hamon F.:Le référendum, Etude comparative (Paris :LGDJ, 2006), p.76.
Documents pour servir à lhistoire de l'élaboration de la Constitution du 4 octobre 1958, (Paris, La Documentation française, 1997).
Les pouvoirs publics, Textes essentiels, 8e édition ( Paris, La Documentation française, 2002) p.II-47.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:自定論文開放時間 user define
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus:永不公開 not available
校外 Off-campus:永不公開 not available

您的 IP(校外) 位址是 3.235.145.95
論文開放下載的時間是 校外不公開

Your IP address is 3.235.145.95
This thesis will be available to you on Indicate off-campus access is not available.

紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 永不公開 not available

QR Code