影響立法委員提案通過因素之分析：提案類型與政黨的影響

Abstract

本文的研究目的是探討立法委員所屬黨籍與提案方式是否將影響法案通過率高低，以我國第九屆立法院為研究對象。過去國會相關研究有將立法委員提案方式加以分類，並且大多以「提案」為量化分析單位，但本文第一階段以「提案」為單位進行邏輯斯迴歸的結果發現，執政黨陣營立委跟著行政院提出對案，法案通過率並不是最高的，此結果不符合本文研究假設，此外，筆者亦發現，以提案為分析單位在研究法案通過情況時不夠精確，故本文進一步以「條文」為分析單位，將立法委員提案類型與修法的條文類型加以區分，更細緻地觀察立委提案方式與修法類型對於法案通過率的影響。 第二階段以條文為分析的研究結果有三大重要發現：第一，立法委員在修法前不僅會觀察行政院是否有先行提案，亦會觀察其他立法委員是否有先行提出草案修正，甚至是參考其他黨籍立委的提案，提出相似內容的文字修正；第二，在一致政府時期，反對黨立委不會在提案中大量彰顯不同的政策立場，相反地，會參考行政院或其他（甚至跨黨籍）立委的提案，提出相似內容的文字修正，導致在「修改與行政院草案條文重疊」時的條文通過率比執政黨還高；第三，在一致政府時期，執政黨立委會提出與行政院立場不同的提案，而且提案修改之條文數量會比反對黨還多，導致在「修改與行政院草案條文重疊」時通過率可能低於反對黨。 本文的在學術上的貢獻有兩個，第一個是一改過往僅以「提案」為單位的分析模式，增加「條文」內容分析的方法研究法案通過率，第二個是建立立委修改條文類型的標準，將其分為「立場型」、「程度型」與「相似型」，藉此檢視、探討立委提案時修改文字的情況。本文在實務上亦可以提供讀者反思公民監督國會聯盟（以下簡稱公督盟）評鑑立委的立法表現時，其評鑑指標是否能確實反映出立法委員實質的立法效能？若一昧地專注於提案三讀通過數量，將無助於增進公共利益，若要實際評量立法委員立法問政與提案的品質，應該加以檢視每位立法委員的修改條文是否與行政院或其他立委重疊，並同時觀察修改之內容是否與行政院或其他立委的提案相似。

By taking the Ninth Legislative Yuan of Taiwan as the object of research, the purpose of this paper is to discuss whether the political parties and the bill initiation behavior of the legislators would influence the bill passage rate. Just like many of the previous research in this area, this paper uses “proposals” as the quantitative analysis unit during the first stage of the research. However, the result from the first stage logistic models suggested that the bill passage rates are not the highest for the legislators from the ruling party faction when they initiated the bill based on the draft of the executive branch. Such a result contradicts with the research hypothesis of this paper. In addition, the result from the first stage analysis also suggested that using “proposals” as the quantitative analysis unit may not be an accurate method to analyze the bill passage rate. Hence, this paper further uses “articles” of the legislative proposals as the unit of analysis during the second stage of the research. In order to observe the influence of bill initiation behavior and the content of articles on the bill passage rate in a more detailed way, the legislative proposals and the articles proposed are being classified into "position type," "degree type," and "similar type."

The article-based research results in the second stage produced three important findings. First, before initiating any legislative proposals, the legislators will not only observe whether the Executive Yuan has advanced proposals, but they will also observe whether other legislators, even from different parties, have initiated legislative proposals in advance. By doing so, legislators might initiate a similar, or even an identical proposal accordingly. Second, during the period of unified government, the legislators of the opposition parties will not express many different positions in their legislative proposals when compared to the draft of the Executive Yuan. Instated, the legislators from the opposition will refer to the legislative proposals initiated by the Executive Yuan or other legislators, which they will then initiate similar proposals accordingly in order to achieve a higher bill passage rate. Third, during the period of unified government, the legislators of the ruling party will, surprisingly, express different positions in their legislative proposals when compared to the draft of the Executive Yuan. Such “position type” proposals initiated by the ruling party are actually more than the opposition parties, which may result in a lower bill passage rate for the legislators of the ruling party when their legislative proposals are overlapping with the draft of the Executive Yuan.

This paper makes two important academic contributions in the field of relevant research. First, by adding "articles" of the legislative proposals as the quantitative analysis unit for the very first time, this paper introduces a more precise and accurate method of analyzing the bill passage rate. Such a method is more superior compared to the previous research that only uses “proposals” as the quantitative analysis unit. Second, by classifying the legislative proposals and the content of articles into "position type," "degree type," and "similar type," this paper established an innovative and unique standard to examine the quality of the legislative proposals initiated by the legislators. In practice, such a standard can provide readers with reflections on whether the evaluation indicators of the Citizen Congress Watch (CCW) are accurate or not. Do the evaluation indicators of CCW truly and precisely reflect the actual legislative effectiveness of legislators? If we only focus on the number of legislative proposals that are being passed, it will not help to promote the public interest. If we actually want to evaluate the quality of legislative questions and proposals of legislators accurately, we should examine whether or not the articles of the proposals initiated by each legislator are overlapped with the draft of the Executive Yuan or other legislators, and meanwhile observe whether the revised contents are similar to the draft of the Executive Yuan or other legislators.