节大磊:美国的政治极化与美国民主

选择字号:   本文共阅读 4330 次 更新时间:2016-09-17 01:36:45

进入专题: 政治极化   美国民主   否决政治   民主  

节大磊 (进入专栏)  
The American Direct Primary (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2002).

   [25] 少数几个实行封闭性初选的州允许选民在初选当天进行登记,因此比较接近“半封闭型”甚至“开放型”初选。

   [26] 关于“策略性投票”,参见Gary W. Cox, Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in World’s Electoral Systems (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1997)。

   [27] 以上数字包括哥伦比亚特区,截止到2016年1月。实行其他类型初选的州包括路易斯安纳州、阿拉斯加州、华盛顿州和加利福尼亚州。路易斯安纳州不实行初选;在阿拉斯加州,除了共和党(实行半封闭型初选)以外的其他政党实行“无差别初选”(blanket primary),即所有政党候选人在同一张选票上同时参加初选,每一个政党得票最多的候选人则称为此党的提名人选。华盛顿州和加利福尼亚州实行所谓“前两名初选”(top two primary),即所有候选人在同一张选票上同时参加初选,得票前两名者获得参加大选的资格。值得指出的是,得票前两名者可以来自不同政党,也可以来自同一政党。http://www.fairvote.org/primaries#open_and_closed_primaries.

   [28] David W. Brady, Hahrie Han, and Jeremy C. Pope, “Primary Elections and Candidate Ideology: Out of Step with the Primary Electorate?” Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Feb., 2007), p. 91.

   [29] “Transcript: Sen. Joe Lieberman on ‘Fox News Sunday’,” January 29, 2007, http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/01/29/transcript-sen-joe-lieberman-on-fox-news-sunday.html.

   [30] Time, April 14, 2006, https://web.archive.org/web/20070212151213/http://www.time.com:80/time/nation/article/0,8599,1183946,00.html

   [31] Sheryl Gay Stolberg, “Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Senator, Is Dead at 82,” New York Times, October 14, 2012.

   [32] Joe Sterling, “Arlen Specter—‘One of the Few Truly Wild Cards’—Dead at 82,” CNN, October 15, 2012, http://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/14/politics/obit-specter/.

   [33] Phil Keisling, “To Reduce Partisanship, Get Rid of Partisans,” New York Times, March 21, 2010.

   [34] Will Bullock, and Joshua D. Clinton, “More a Molehill than a Mountain: The Effects of the Blanket Primary on Elected Officials’ Behavior from California,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 73, No. 3 (Aug. 2011), pp. 915-930.

   [35] 自从美国最高法院1962年的“贝克诉卡尔案”(Baker vs. Carr)的判决之后,美国各州开始进行有规律的十年一次的选区划分。目前美国37个州由州议会主导国会选举的选区划分,6个州由独立性或政治性的委员会进行。另外,还有7个州因为人口关系只有一个众议员席次,因此在实践中不存在选区划分的问题。

   [36] Joanne Dann, “Safe but Sorry: The Way We Redistrict Destroys the Middle Ground,” Washington Post, December 2, 2001.

   [37] 安东尼?唐斯(Anthony Downs)认为,如果选民的偏好呈正态分布,那么两党竞争的结果应当是双方都往中间靠拢。参见Anthony Downs, An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York, NY: HarperCollins, 1957), pp. 117-122。但是在民主党或共和党占据明显优势的选区,选民的偏好显然不是正态分布。

   [38] “安全选区”在这里被定义为某一政党在此选区的得票率超过全国得票率10%或以上,而如果在超过5%和低于5%之间,则是“摇摆选区”。参见Alan I. Abramowitz, The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy, 2010, p. 145。

   [39] Richard H. Pildes, “Why the Center Does Not Hold: The Causes of Hyperpolarized Democracy in America,” 2011, p. 312.

   [40] Alan I. Abramowitz, The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy, 2010, p. 149.

   [41] 关于“在任者优势”,参见David Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974); Gary W. Cox, and Jonathan N. Katz, “Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow?” American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 40, No. 2 (May 1996), pp. 478-497。关于意识形态接近的选民倾向于在地理上聚居的现象,参见Bill Bishop, The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America Is Tearing Us Apart (New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin, 2008)。

   [42] 这里着重讨论众议院,但是参议院也经历了类似的集权、分权、再集权的过程。关于参议院的讨论,参见Frances E. Lee, “Agreeing to Disagree: Agenda Content and Senate Partisanship: 1981-2004,” Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 2 (May, 2008), pp. 199-222。

   [43] Joseph Cooper, and David W. Brady, “Institutional Context and Leadership Style: The House from Cannon to Rayburn,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 75, No. 2 (Jun. 1981), pp. 411-425.

   [44] Barbara Sinclair, Party Wars: Polarization and the Politics of National Policy Making, 2006, Chapter 3.

   [45] 在参议院中,民主党和共和党分别获得49席,但是因为独立参选的乔?利伯曼和伯尼?桑德斯(Bernie Sanders)倾向于民主党,因此事实上民主党在参议院也占据多数。

   [46] Ronald Brownstein, The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America (New York: NY: Penguin Press, 2007), p. 341.

   [47] Barbara Sinclair, Party Wars: Polarization and the Politics of National Policy Making, 2006, Chapter 10;Nolan McCarty, Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal, Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches, 2006, Chapter 6;David R. Jones, “Party Polarization and Legislative Gridlock,” Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 54, No. 1 (Mar. 2001), pp. 125-141;谢韬:《美国国会两党分化的原因及后果》,载《国际论坛》,2009年第1期,第65-71页。

   [48] 赵梅,《美国的迷惘》(上),载《经济观察报》,2016年4月6号。另外,一个民调数字也能说明这一点:在对政府感到“愤怒”的共和党人里,有64%的人对特朗普持正面看法,而只有36%对杰布?布什持正面看法。参见Pew Research Center, “Beyond Distrust: How Americans View Their Government,” November 23, 2015, p. 14,http://www.people-press.org/files/2015/11/11-23-2015-Governance-release.pdf。

   [49] David C. King, “The Polarization of American Parties and Mistrust of Government,” in Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Philip D. Zelikow, and David C. King eds., Why People Don’t Trust Government (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), pp. 155-178.

   [50] Robert Kagan, “Trump Is the GOP’s Frankenstein Monster. Now He’s Strong Enough to Destroy the Party,” Washington Post, February 25, 2016.

   [51] Pew Research Center, “Beyond Distrust: How Americans View Their Government,” November 23, 2015, pp. 84-86.

   [52] Geoffrey C. Layman, Thomas M. Carsey, and Juliana Menasce Horowitz, “Party Polarization in American Politics: Characteristics, Causes, and Consequences,” Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 9, 2006, pp. 101-103.

   [53] American Political Science Association, “A Report of the Committee on Political Parties: Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System,” September 1950.

  

   原载《美国研究》2016年第2期

进入 节大磊 的专栏     进入专题: 政治极化   美国民主   否决政治   民主  

本文责编:川先生
发信站:爱思想(http://www.aisixiang.com),栏目:天益学术 > 政治学 > 比较政治
本文链接:http://www.aisixiang.com/data/101393.html
文章来源:作者授权爱思想发布,转载请注明出处(http://www.aisixiang.com)。

5 推荐

在方框中输入电子邮件地址,多个邮件之间用半角逗号(,)分隔。

爱思想(aisixiang.com)网站为公益纯学术网站,旨在推动学术繁荣、塑造社会精神。
凡本网首发及经作者授权但非首发的所有作品,版权归作者本人所有。网络转载请注明作者、出处并保持完整,纸媒转载请经本网或作者本人书面授权。
凡本网注明“来源:XXX(非爱思想网)”的作品,均转载自其它媒体,转载目的在于分享信息、助推思想传播,并不代表本网赞同其观点和对其真实性负责。若作者或版权人不愿被使用,请来函指出,本网即予改正。
Powered by aisixiang.com Copyright © 2020 by aisixiang.com All Rights Reserved 爱思想 京ICP备12007865号 京公网安备11010602120014号.
工业和信息化部备案管理系统