Type of Credit: Elective
Credit(s)
Number of Students
本課程的主要目的是要引導同學們閱讀、討論、與評論立法研究的相關文獻，並且從這個過程中來思考國會與國會議員行為的相關議題。課程將會從國會在民主政治中的制度設計，以及主要民主國家與發展中國家國會的特色與功能談起，然後討論國會議員的代表行為如何受到他本身的目的，以及國會外與國會內的因素所影響，這些因素包括選區、政黨、利益團體、委員會制度、行政機關、正式與非正式的制度與規則等等。預期同學們修習完本課程，應該能夠理解與熟悉國會研究的基本概念與理論，並且運用適當的理論與概念分析與研究國會政治運作與現象。
能力項目說明
預期同學們修習完本課程，應該具備以下能力：
1.能夠理解與熟悉國會研究的基本概念與理論
2.挖掘國會研究重要研究議題，並且試著去解答
3.運用適當的理論與概念分析國會政治運作與現象
| 教學週次Course Week | 彈性補充教學週次Flexible Supplemental Instruction Week | 彈性補充教學類別Flexible Supplemental Instruction Type |
|---|---|---|
2/19 課程介紹
2/26 國會、國會制度與國會議員
Olson, David M. 1994. Democratic Legislative Institution: A Comparative View. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. chap.1.
*Davidson, Roger H. and Walter J. Oleszek. 2010. Congress and Its Members. 12th ed. Washington, D. C.: A Division of Congressional Quarterly Inc. chaps. 1 and 16.
*Mayhew, David. 1987. “Congress: The Electoral Connection.” In The American Congress Reader, eds. Steven S. Smith, Jason M. Robert and Ryan J Vander Wielen. Cambridge: Cambridge.
Poyet, Corentin and Mihail Chira. 2021. “The Electoral Connection Revisited: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Political Studies Review 19(3): 327-333.
*Powell, Bingham. G. 2000. Elections as Instruments of Democracy: Majoritarian and Proportional Visions. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. chap. 2
3/4 代表與代表行為
*Miller, Warren and Donald Stokes. 1963. "Constituency Influence in Congress." American Political Science Review 56 (1): 43-56.
*Eulau, Heinz and Paul D. Karps. 1978. "The Puzzle of Representation: Specifying Components of Responsiveness. In The Politics of Representation: Continuities in Theory and Research, eds. Heinz Eulau and John C. Wahlke. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. pp. 55-72.
*Fenno, Richard. Jr. 1977. “U.S. House Members in Their Constituencies: An Exploration.” American Political Science Review 71 (3):883-917.
*盛杏湲，2001，〈立法委員正式與非正式立法參與之研究：以第三屆立法院為例〉，《問題與研究》，40(5):81-104。
延伸閱讀：
Achen, Christopher. 1978. "Measuring Representation," American Journal of Political Science 22 (2): 475- 510.
Weissberg, Robert. 1978. “Collective vs. Dyadic Representation in Congress,” American Political Science Review 72 (2): 535-547.
3/11 選區經營
*Cain, Bruce, John Ferejohn, and Morris Fiorina. 1984. “The Constituency Service Basis of the Personal Vote for U. S. Representatives and British Members of Parliament.” American Political Science Review 78 (1):110-125.
*Siefken S.T., Costa O. 2018. “Available, Accessible and Ready to Listen: MPs’ District Work.” In: Political Representation in France and Germany. New Perspectives in German Political Studies. eds. Gabriel O., Kerrouche E., Schüttemeyer S. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. pp.87-115.
*黃秀端，1994，《選區服務》，台北：唐山出版社。Chaps. 3, 5-6.
*羅清俊，1998，〈分配政策研究的發展與應用〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》, 10 (4):575-609.
延伸閱讀：
Fiorina, Morris P. 1989. Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. second ed. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. chap. 10.
3/18 選舉與國會政治
*Carey, John and Mathew S. Shugart. 1995. “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: a Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas.” Electoral Studies 14: 419-439.
*Arnold, R. Douglas. 1990. The Logic of Congressional Action. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. chaps. 1 and 4.
*Lancaster, Thomas D. 1986. “Electoral Structure and Pork Barrel Politics.” International Political Science Review 7 (1): 67-81.
*Batto, Nathan F. and Emily Beaulieu. 2020. “Partisan Conflict and Citizens’ Democratic Attitudes: How Partisanship Shapes Reactions to Legislative Brawls.” The Journal of Politics 82 (1): 315-328.
3/25 選舉制度與立法行為
*Jang, Jinhyeok and Nick C. Lin. 2019. “Personal Votes, Electoral Competitiveness of Parties, and Legislative Representation in Taiwan under SNTV.” Japanese Journal of Political Science 20:21-32.
*Hirano, Shigeo. 2006. “Electoral Institutions, Hometowns, and Favored Minorities: Evidence from Japanese Electoral Reforms.” World Politics 58:51-82.
*Sieberer, Ulrich. 2010. “Behavioral Consequences of Mixed Electoral Systems: Deviating Voting Behavior of District and List MPs in the German Bundestag.” Electoral Studies 29 (3): 484-496.
*André, Audrey, Sam Depauw, and Shane Martin. 2016. “The Classification of Electoral Systems: Bringing Legislators Back in.” Electoral Studies 42: 42-53.
4/1 政黨與國會政治 (I)
*Cox, Gary W. and Mathew D. McCubbins. 1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press. chaps. 4-5.
*Sinclair, Barbara. 1999. "Transformational Leader or Faithful Agent? Principal- Agent Theory and House Majority Party Leadership." Legislative Studies Quarterly 24(3): 421-449.
*Aldrich, John H. And David W. Rohde. 2001. “The Logic of Conditional Party Government: Revisiting the Electoral Connection.” In Congress Reconsidered, 7th ed, eds. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. Washington, D. C.: A Division of Congressional Quarterly Inc. chaps. pp. 269-292.
*盛杏湲，2008，〈政黨的國會領導與凝聚力：2000年政黨輪替前後的觀察〉，《台灣民主季刊》, 5 (4):1-46.
4/8政黨與國會政治(II)
*Bowler, Shaun. 2002. “Parties in Legislature: Two Competing Explanations.” In Parties Without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies, eds. Russell J. Dalton and Martin P. Wattenberg. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 157-179.
*Curry, James M., and Frances E. Lee. 2019. “Non-Party Government: Bipartisan Lawmaking and Party Power in Congress.” Perspectives on Politics 17(1): 47-65.
*Egar, William . T. 2016. “Tarnishing Opponents, Polarizing Congress: The House Minority Party and the Construction of the Roll-Call Record.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 41(4): 935-964.
*Carey, John. 2007. “Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (1): 92-107.
4/15 立法組織與立法行為
*Cox, Gary W. 2006. "The Organization of Democratic Legislatures." In The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, eds. Barrry Weingast and Donald Wittman. Oxford: Oxford University. pp. 141-161.
*Hicken, Allen, and Heather Stoll. 2017. “Legislative Policy-Making Authority, Party System Size, and Party System Nationalization.” Electoral Studies 47: 113-124.
*Huang, Isaac Shih-hao, and Shing-yuan Sheng. Forthcoming. 2022. “Rethinking the Decentralization of Legislative Organization and its Implications for Policymaking: Evidence from Taiwan.” Government and Opposition. 57: 318-335.
*盛杏湲、黃士豪，2017。〈黨團協商機制：從制度化觀點分析〉。《東吳政治學報》，35 (1):39-93。
*丁鼎，2021，〈我國立法院黨團協商的制度變遷與制度化〉，《政治科學論叢》，88：1-50。
延伸閱讀：
邱訪義、鄭元毓。2014。〈立法院黨團協商：少數霸凌多數亦或是多數主場優勢〉。《政治科學論叢》62：155-194。
4/22 議程設定與立法行為
*Döring, Herbert, 1995. “Time as a Scarce Resource: Government Control of the Agenda.” In Parliaments and Majority Rule in Western Europe, ed. Herbert Döring, New York: St. Martin’s Press.
*Nalepa, Monik. 2016. “Party Institutionalization and Legislative Organization: The Evolution of Agenda Power in the Polish Parliament.” The Journal of Comparative Politics 48 (3): 353-372.
*Cox, Gary W. and Mathew D. McCubbins. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the U.S. House of Representatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. chaps. 2-3.
*邱訪義、李誌偉，2013，〈立法院消極議程控制的邏輯與經驗分析，1993-2011〉，《東吳政治學報》，31（4）：1-70。
延伸閱讀
*Kingdon, John W. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy. Harper Collins Publishers. chaps. 7-9.
4/29 國會常設委員會的立法角色
確定期末報告題目
*楊婉瑩，2002，〈立法院委員會的決策角色：以第三屆立法院為例〉，《問題與研究》，41(4):83-113。
*Maltzman, Forrest and Steven S. Smith. 1994. “Principals, Goals, Dimensionality and Congressional Committees.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 19 (4): 457-476.
*Hurwitz, Mark J., Roger J. Moiles and David W. Rohde. 2001. “Distributive and Partisan Issues in Agriculture Policies in the 104 House.” American Political Science Review 95(4):911-922.
*Curry, James M. 2019. “Knowledge, Expertise, and Committee Power in the Contemporary Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 44 (2): 203-237.
5/6 國會與行政機關
*Schroedel, Jean Reith. 1994. Congress, the President and Policymaking. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. chaps. 6-7.
*McCubbins, Mathew D. and Gregory W. Noble. 1995. “The Appearance of Power: Legislators, Bureaucrats, and the Budget Process in the United States and Japan.” In Structure and Policy in Japan and the United States, eds. Cowhey, Peter F. and Mathew D. McCubbins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 56-80.
*Tsebelis, George and Bjorn Erick Rasch. 2011. "Government and Legislative Agenda Setting: An Introduction.” In The Role of Governments in Legislative Agenda Setting. eds. Bjorn Erik Rasch and George Tsebelis. New York, NY: Routledge. pp.1-20.
*盛杏湲，2014，〈從立法提案到立法產出：比較行政院與立法院在立法過程的影響力〉，載於《轉型中的行政與立法》，東吳大學政治學系國會研究中心編，台北：五南出版社。
5/13 立法成敗的邏輯
*Anderson, William D., Janet Box-Steffensmeier and Vleria Sinclair-Chapman. 2003. “The Keys to Legislative Success in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 28 (3): 357-386.
*Binder, Sarah A. 1999. “The Dynamics of Legislative Gridlock, 1947-1996.” American Political Science Review 93 (3): 519-533.
*Canes-Wrone, Brandice and Scott de Marchi. 2002. “Presidential Approval and Legislative Success.” The Journal of Politics 64 (2): 491-509.
*陳宏銘，2012，〈半總統制下法案推動與立法影響力：馬英九總統執政時期之研究〉，《東吳政治學報》，30(2)：1-70。
*盛杏湲，2012，〈媒體報導對企業型政治立法成敗的影響〉，《東吳政治學報》，30(1)：1-42。
5/20 校慶停課
5/27 立法機關的制度化與表現
*Polsby, Nelson W. 1968. “The Institutionalization of the U. S. House of Representatives.” American Political Science Review 62 (1): 144-168.
*Carey, John M., Frantisek Formanek and Ewa Karpowicz, 1999. "Legislative Autonomy in New Regimes: The Czech and Polish Cases." Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (4): 569-603.
*Wilson, Rick K. 1999. “Transitional Governance in the United States: Lessons from the First Federal Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (4): 543-568.
*Amorim Neto, Octavio and Fabiano Santos. 2003. “The Inefficient Secret Revisited: The Legislative Input and Output of Brazilian Deputies.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 28 (4): 449-479.
6/3 報告與討論
6/10 端午節放假
6/17 自主學習 參與6/15-16國會研討會 繳交學習心得者可加分1-3分
1.上課出席、口頭報告、參與討論（20%）
2.讀後心得(30%)，針對標示＊的reading任選6篇作心得報告，請就論文當中的重要論述加以「討論」，並且思索此一論述的合理性，若是探討外國的論文，則也請討論是否適合用在描述臺灣的狀況（一週最多繳交一篇，每篇以1 page為原則，至多不超過2 pages，每位同學討論中文論文最多2篇，你要多繳交報告也非常歡迎，我會挑選最好的6篇計分）
3.期末報告 (50%)，字數約10000字，可以在以下二者擇一，最遲要在４／２９以前確定題目，並在之前與老師討論。
a.一個研究設計：選擇一個立法研究的研究問題，討論相關文獻，並提出你的理論，然後說可以如何作這個研究。注意這不是方法論的報告，因此請將重點放在研究問題、文獻討論，與你的理論上。
b.一個實際研究：針對一個國會的研究問題，作一個「不用太大的」研究，作一個簡單的質化或量化的分析，不用太複雜。譬如深入訪談幾位立委或立委助理、參與觀察立法院、或對某一個或某幾個法案、或記名投票做簡單的分析。立法院網站及國會圖書館提供許多相關資料，立法院網址：http://www.ly.gov.tw。立法院國會圖書館網址：https://npl.ly.gov.tw/do/www/homePage。
參考每週上課進度。
無