選區劃分與代表角色之探討

陳彥欣

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/34541

DC Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.advisor	游清鑫	zh_TW
dc.contributor.author	陳彥欣	zh_TW
dc.creator	陳彥欣	zh_TW
dc.date	2006	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2009-09-19T07:41:32Z	-
dc.date.available	2009-09-19T07:41:32Z	-
dc.date.issued	2009-09-19T07:41:32Z	-
dc.identifier	G0922520131	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/34541	-
dc.description	碩士	zh_TW
dc.description	國立政治大學	zh_TW
dc.description	政治研究所	zh_TW
dc.description	92252013	zh_TW
dc.description	95	zh_TW
dc.description.abstract	選區劃分長期以來被視為只是行政上的業務，缺乏一套較為完整的理論。各項選區劃分的原則彼此之間也存在著結構上的矛盾，使得各國實際劃分選區時，常常必須在各項原則之間進行取捨。本研究採用歷史與制度研究法以及比較研究法，來探索不同的選區劃分方式背後所隱含的代表精神為何，希望能將選區劃分與代表理論相結合，為將來我國面臨選區劃分原則衝突時，提供一個思考如何進行取捨的方向。\n全權委託模式以及委任模式是代議模式的兩個典型，但實際上代表們不可能只選取其一來面對所有議題。代表們要以何種代議模式為主，除了視各選區不同的狀況之外，我們也可以從選區的設計不同，來分析代表應該扮演何種角色。\n今日英國選區劃分的特色，在於其相當注重維護社群的完整，所以容許選區之間有較大程度的人口數差距；美國的選區劃分則比較注重各選區人口數均等原則，因此對於地區的切割與重組較為普遍。值得注意的是，今日美國的選區劃分仍然可以見到各種不同形式的傑利蠑螈劃分法。\n從第七屆開始，台灣的立法委員選舉制度將改成所謂單一選區兩票制。在改制之後，可以預見區域立法委員與其選區之間的關係會更為密切，這也將使立法委員偏重於扮演委任代表的角色。	zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents	第一章緒論.................................................1\n第一節研究緣起與目的........................................1\n第二節研究方法.............................................2\n第三節論文章節安排..........................................4\n第二章代表與選區之關係......................................7\n第一節代表的意涵............................................7\n第二節選民與代表的關係.....................................13\n第三節選區與代表...........................................20\n第四節小結................................................27\n第三章英國的選區劃分.......................................29\n第一節歷史沿革............................................29\n第二節各階段所代表的意義....................................34\n第三節小結................................................48\n第四章美國的選區劃分.......................................53\n第一節歷史沿革............................................53\n第二節各階段所代表的意義....................................58\n第三節小結................................................73\n第五章台灣的選區劃分.......................................77\n第一節歷史沿革............................................77\n第二節各階段所代表的意義....................................86\n第三節第七屆立法委員選舉制度之分析...........................98\n第四節小結...............................................110\n第六章結論...............................................115\n第一節研究發現...........................................115\n第二節檢討與建議..........................................118\n參考書目..................................................121\n附錄.....................................................137\n附錄一：民國五十八年立法委員之增選選區劃分....................137\n附錄二：民國六十一年增額立法委員選舉選區劃分..................138\n附錄三：民國六十四年增額立法委員選舉選區劃分..................139\n附錄四：民國六十七年增額立法委員選舉選區劃分..................140\n附錄五：民國六十九年增額立法委員選舉選區劃分..................141\n附錄六：民國七十二年增額立法委員選舉選區劃分..................142\n附錄七：民國七十五年增額立法委員選舉選區劃分..................143\n附錄八：民國七十八年增額立法委員選舉選區劃分..................144\n附錄九：第二屆立法委員選舉選區劃分...........................145\n附錄十：第三屆立法委員選舉選區劃分...........................146\n附錄十一：第四屆立法委員選舉選區劃分.........................147\n附錄十二：第五屆立法委員選舉選區劃分.........................148\n附錄十三：第六屆立法委員選舉選區劃分.........................149\n附錄十四：台北縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖....................150\n附錄十五：桃園縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖....................151\n附錄十六：苗栗縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖....................152\n附錄十七：台中縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖....................153\n附錄十八：彰化縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖....................154\n附錄十九：南投縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖....................155\n附錄二十：雲林縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖....................156\n附錄二十一：嘉義縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................157\n附錄二十二：台南縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................158\n附錄二十三：高雄縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................159\n附錄二十四：屏東縣第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................160\n附錄二十五：台中市第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................161\n附錄二十六：台南市第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................162\n附錄二十七：台北市第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................163\n附錄二十八：高雄市第七屆立法委員選區劃分簡圖..................164\n\n\n \n表次\n表3-1：英格蘭自治市鎮的選民數................................35\n表3-2：十九世紀與二十世紀初英國平民院組成方式之變..............36\n表3-3：英國各地區在十九世紀改革後各區域的席次變動狀況...........38\n表3-4：英格蘭與威爾斯在一八六七年、一八八五年改革法案前後各項比例41\n表3-5：一八八一年英國全國選區人口數、選民數與代表數情形.........43\n表3-6：英格蘭與威爾斯各區域於十九世紀改革後席次得失狀況.........47\n表3-7：英國平民院席次分配情形................................49\n表4-1：美國各時期眾議院席次分配..............................56\n表4-2：單一政黨傑利蠑螈劃分法................................68\n表4-3：模擬傑利蠑螈劃分法...................................69\n表4-4：採取兩黨傑利蠑螈劃分法的州以及選區數....................71\n表4-5：美國眾議員的代議模式..................................74\n表5-1：世界主要民主國家國會議員人數...........................78\n表5-2：原住民代表席次比例的變遷..............................81\n表5-3：第一屆立法委員選舉選區數與應選名額.....................88\n表5-4：不同制度在政黨比例性、政黨、選風、政風的綜合比較........100\n表5-5：第七屆立法委員直轄市、縣市名額分配表...................104\n表5-6：第七屆立法委員選舉區域劃分案..........................106\n\n\n \n圖次\n圖4-1：一九九二年北卡羅來納州聯邦眾議員選舉選區劃分圖形.........63\n圖4-2：一九九二年北卡羅來納州聯邦眾議員選舉第一選區圖形.........64\n圖4-3：一九九二年北卡羅來納州聯邦眾議員選舉第十二選區圖形.......65	zh_TW
dc.format.extent	256240 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	257538 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	265991 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	261374 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	265464 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	305532 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	319175 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	967957 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	372423 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	268059 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	302983 bytes	-
dc.format.extent	1897931 bytes	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.language.iso	en_US	-
dc.source.uri	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0922520131	en_US
dc.subject	選區劃分	zh_TW
dc.subject	全權委託模式	zh_TW
dc.subject	委任模式	zh_TW
dc.subject	傑利蠑螈劃分法	zh_TW
dc.subject	立法委員	zh_TW
dc.title	選區劃分與代表角色之探討	zh_TW
dc.type	thesis	en
dc.relation.reference	一. 中文部分	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	中央選舉委員會	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1989 中華民國58年增選、61年、64年增額立法委員選舉概況。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1990 中華民國67年、69年增額立法委員選舉概況。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1984 動員戡亂時期自由地區增額立法委員選舉選舉實錄。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1987 動員戡亂時期自由地區增加中央民意代表名額選舉選舉實錄。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1991 動員戡亂時期自由地區增額立法委員選舉選舉實錄。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1994 第二屆立法委員選舉實錄。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1996 第三屆立法委員選舉實錄。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1999 第四屆立法委員選舉實錄。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2002 第五屆立法委員選舉實錄。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2006 第七屆立法委員直轄市縣市選舉區劃分變更案，	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	http://210.69.23.136/default.asp，擷取日期2006/08/31。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	王業立	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1996 《我國選舉制度的政治影響》，台北：五南。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2001 〈未來立法委員選制調整的幾個方向及其利弊分析〉，《國會改革	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	台灣民主憲政的新境界？》，台北：新台灣人文教基金會，頁13- 26。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2006 《比較選舉制度》，台北：五南。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	江亮演、賴保禎、張德聰、紀俊臣、江林英基、吳永猛、杜正榮合著	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 《社會科學概論》，台北：商鼎文化出版社。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	呂世昌	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2002 〈單一選區兩票制政治效果之研究〉，國立台灣師範大學三民主義	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	研究所博士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	李美賢	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1989 〈中華民國增額立法委員政治角色之研究〉，國立政治大學三民主	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	義研究所碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	吳世正	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1990 〈僑選中央民意代表制度問題之研究〉，國立政治大學政治研究所	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	吳烟村	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1974 〈六十一年台北市增加國大代表、立法委員選舉之研究〉，國立政	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	林士郁	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2000 〈比較各國單一選舉區與比例代表混合制－德、日、俄、韓、匈五	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	國為實例分析〉，國立台北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	周育仁、楊鈞池	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2001 〈中選舉區的可行性與妥當性〉，《國會改革：台灣民主憲政的新	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	境界》，台北：新台灣人基金會，頁27-44。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	易君博	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1984 《政治理論與研究方法》，台北：三民書局。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	郎裕憲	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1987 〈民國五十八年中央公職人員之增、補選舉〉，《中華民國選	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	舉史》，台北：中央選舉委員會，頁：389-428。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	徐永明	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2002 〈落實立法委員選制改革之策略〉，《國會改革與憲政發展》，	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	台北：國家政策研究基金會，頁109-142。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	盛杏湲	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	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〉	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	，《問題與研究》，第四十卷，第五期，頁81-104。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2003 〈政黨、選區與立法委員的代表角色與行為〉，《兩岸立法制度與	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	立法運作》，台北：韋伯文化，頁117-158。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 〈選區代表與集體代表：立法委員的代表角色〉，《東吳政治	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	學報》，第二十一期，頁1-40。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	盛杏湲、黃士豪	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 〈台灣民眾為什麼討厭立法院〉，台灣選舉與民主化調查2005年	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	國際學術研討會論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	張世熒	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2006 〈影響第七屆立法委員選舉桃園縣單一選區劃分的因素分析〉	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	，2006年中國政治學會年會暨『憲政、民主與人權』學術研討	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	會論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	張福建	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1998 〈議會及議員的職責：艾德蒙．柏克（E. Burke）代表理念的可	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	能貢獻及其限制〉，《中興大學行政學報》，第二十九期，頁：	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	133-150。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	張福建、劉義周	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2002 〈代表理論與實際〉，《政治與社會哲學評論》，第一期，頁117	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	-149。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	陳文俊	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1987 〈行憲第一屆中央民意代表之選舉〉，《中華民國選舉史》，台北	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	：中央選舉委員會，頁287-388。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	陳永芳譯	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2003 《比較政治的理論與方法》，台北：韋伯文化。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	陳義彥	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1998 〈政治信任感〉，《台灣人看政治》，台北：二十一世紀基	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	金會，頁107-146。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	游清鑫	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1990 《選舉區規劃對選舉競爭影響之研究》，國立政治大學政治研	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	究所碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1994 〈選區規劃與選舉競爭〉，《選舉研究》，第一卷，第一期，頁	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	147-170。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	游清鑫、王業立、劉義周	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 《修憲後選區劃分法制化問題之研究》，內政部委託研究報告。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	黃秀端	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1994 《選區服務：立法委員心目中連任之基礎》，台北：唐山出版社。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	黃玲華	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 〈台灣原住民運動的國會路線〉，國立政治大學民族學系碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	黃偉峰	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 〈從比較的觀點論英國『選區規劃委員會』〉，《國民大會憲政改	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	革委員會常務委員會委託專題研究報告》，台北：國民大會秘書處	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	，頁87-108。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	黃琛瑜	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2001 《英國政府與政治》，台北：五南。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	彭錦鵬	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2001 〈從歐美經驗論國會議員人數及「立法委員席次減半」〉，《國會	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	改革台灣民主憲政的新境界？》，台北：新台灣人文教基金會，	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	頁101-126。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	彭樹勛	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1986 《中華民國行憲以來之立法院》，台北：成文出版社。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	彭懷恩	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 〈選區劃分的理論與實踐－兼論我國選舉制度的改進方向〉，《國	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	民大會憲政改革委員會常務委員會委託專題研究報告》，台北：國	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	民大會秘書處，頁79-86。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	隋杜卿	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2002 〈立法委員選制改革對政治運作的影響—以『單一選區兩票制』	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	為例〉，《國會改革與憲政發展》，台北：國家政策研究基金會，	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	頁143-189。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	楊幼炯	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1965 〈代議政治與選舉制度〉，《選舉之理論與實踐》，台北：國民大	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	會秘書處，頁69-123。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	楊泰順	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1991 《選舉》，台北：永然文化。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	葉振輝	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1985 〈選舉區之劃分〉，《中華民國選舉罷免制度》，台北：中央選舉	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	委員會，頁133-188。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	鄒文海	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1988 《代議政治》，台北：帕米爾書店。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	潘春義	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2002 〈原住民的身份與選區劃分之研究〉，國立中山大學政治研究	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	所在職專班碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	蔡韻竹	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 〈代表理論在台灣的實踐－第三屆至第五屆立法院〉，2005年台	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	灣政治學會年會暨『台灣民主的挑戰與前景』學術研討會論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	劉世康	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 〈我國立法委員選舉制度改革之研究〉，東海大學政治研究所碩士	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	劉冠效	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1991 〈代表理論與日本選舉制度之研究〉，淡江大學日本研究所碩士	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	劉昶演	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 〈民意代表的角色傾向－以第三屆立法委員為例〉，國立中山大政	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	治學研究所碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	劉鐵錚	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1985 《職婦團體代表選舉制度之研究》，台北：中央選舉委員會。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	蔣慶、王瑞昌、王天成譯	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2004 《自由與傳統－柏克政治論文選》，台北：桂冠。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	盧瑞鍾	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 〈選舉區之劃分原則〉，《國民大會憲政改革委員會常務委員會	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	委託專題研究報告》，台北：國民大會秘書處，頁109-122。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	謝欣如	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1992 〈立法委員選舉方式之研究〉，國立台灣大學三民主義研究所碩	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	謝侑道	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1989 〈從西德聯邦議會選舉制度論我國立法委員選舉制度之改革〉，國	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	立政治大學政治研究所碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	謝相慶	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1996 〈選舉制度與選舉結果不比例性之比較研究〉，國立政治大學政治	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	研究所博士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2004 〈單一選舉區界線劃分及其政治效應－以我國第七屆立法委員選舉	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	為例〉，2004年台灣政治學會年會暨『關鍵年代與多元政治』學術	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	研討會論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2006 〈國會議員名額比例分配之計算方法－美國眾議員與我國立法委員	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	之比較〉，2006年中國政治學會年會暨『憲政、民主與人權』學術	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	研討會論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	謝復生	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1992 《政黨比例代表制》，台北：理論與政策雜誌。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2001 〈對國會選舉制度改革的幾點建議〉，《國會改革：台灣民主憲政	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	的新境界》，台北：新台灣人基金會，頁3-12。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	薩孟武	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1963 《政治學》，台北：三民書局。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	羅俊強	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2000 〈行憲第一屆立法委員之研究〉，國立台灣師範大學歷史研究所	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	碩士論文。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	羅孟浩	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1968 《英國政府與政治》，台北：國立政治大學叢書。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	嚴震生	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 〈美國國會選區的劃分〉，《國民大會憲政改革委員會常務委員會	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	委託專題研究報告》，台北：國民大會秘書處，頁61-67。	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	二. 英文部分	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	APSA	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1951 “The Reappointment of Congress”, The American	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Political Science Review, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	153-157.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Bailey, Stephen K.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1966 The New Congress, New York: St. Martin`s Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1970 Congress in the Seventies, New York: St. Martin`s	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Beer, Samuel	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1957 “The Representation of Interests in British	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Government: Historical Background”, The American	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Political Science Review, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 613-	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	650.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Birch, Anthony H.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1972 Representation, New York: Praeger.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Blondel, J.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1973 Comparative Legislatures, Englewood Cliffs,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	N. J.: Prentice Hall.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Blackbure, Robert	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1995 The electoral system in Britain, New York: St.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Martin`s Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	BullockⅢ, Charles S.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 “Redistricting: Racial and PartisanConsiderations”,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Law and Election Politics, Colorado: Lynne Rienner,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	pp. 151-170.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cain, Bruce E.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1984 The Reapportionment Puzzle, Berkeley, CA: University	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	of California Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cain, Bruce E., John A. Ferejohn, and Morris P. Fiorina	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1979 “The House Is Not a Home: British MPs in Their	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Constituencies”, Legislative Studies Quarterly,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 501-523.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cain, Bruce E., Karin Mac Donald, and Michael McDonald	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 “From Equality to Fairness: The Path of Political	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Reform since Baker v. Carr”, Party Lines,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Washington D.C: The Brookings Institution, pp. 6-30.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cannadine, D.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1996 The Decline and Fall of the British Aristocracy,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	London: Macmillan.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Canon, David T.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 “Race, Redistricting, and the Courts”,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Redistricting in the New Millennium, MD: Lexington	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Books, pp. 87-118.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Chadwick, M. E. J.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1976 “The role of redistribution in the making of the	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Third Reform Act”, The Historical Journal, Vol.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	19, No. 3, pp. 665-684.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cox, Gary W.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 “On the Systemic Consequences of Redistricting	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	in the 1960s”, Redistricting in the New Millennium,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	MD: Lexington Books, pp. 17-37.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cox, Gary W., and Jonathan N. Katz	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1999 “The Reapportionment Revolution and Bias in U.S.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Congressional Elections”, American Journal of	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Political Science, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 812-841.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Craig, William J., and Richard Morrill	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1977 “Redistricting”, Annals of the Association of	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	American Geographers, Vol. 67, No. 4, pp. 641-645.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cranor, John D., Gary L. Crawley, and Raymond H. Scheele	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1989 “The Anatomy of a Gerrymander”, America Journal of	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Political Science, Vol.33, No.1, pp. 222-239.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Davidson, Roger H.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1969 The Role of the Congressman, Indianapolis: Bobbs-	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Merrill.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Desposato, Scott W., and John R. Petrocik	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 “Redistricting and Incumbency: The New Voter	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Effect”, Redistricting in the New Millennium,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	MD: Lexington Books, pp. 35-64.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Dixon, Robert G., Jr	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1971 “The Court, the People, and ‘One Man, One Vote’”,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Reapportionment in the 1970s, California: University	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	of California Press, pp. 7-56.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Eulau, Heinz	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1962 “The Legislator as Representative: Representation	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Role”, The Legislative System: explorations in	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	legislative behavior, New York: Wiley, pp. 267-286.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Ewing, Cortez A. M.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1947 Congressional Elections, Norman: University of	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Oklahoma Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Fenno, Richard	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1978 Home Style: House Member in There Districts, Boston:	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Little, Brown.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Galderisi, Peter F., and Bruce Cain	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2005 “Introduction: Redistricting Past, Present, and	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Future”, Redistricting in the New Millennium, MD:	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Lexington Books, pp. 3-16.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Hanham, H. J.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1978 Elections and Party Management: Politics in the Time	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	of Disraeli and Gladstone, Brighton: Harvester.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Hart, Jenifer	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1992 Proportional representation: critics of the British	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	electoral system 1820-1945, Oxford: Clarendon Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Hibbing, John R., and Samuel C. Patterson	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1986 “Representing a Territory: Constituency Boundaries	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	for the British House of Commons of the 1980s”,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	The Journal of Politics, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 992-	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1005.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Hirst, Derek	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1975 The Representative of the People : Voters and voting	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	in England under the early Stuarts, New York:	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cambridge University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Huckfeldt, Robert, and Carol Weitzel Kohfeld	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1989 Race and the Decline of Class in American Politics,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Chicago: University of Illinois.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Huntington, Samuel P.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1991 The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Century, Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Jennings, William Ivor	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1969 Parliament, London: Cambridge University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Jonhston, R. J.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1985 “People, Place, Parties and Parliaments: A	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Geographical Perspective on Electoral Reform in	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Great Britain”, The Geographical Journal, Vol. 151,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	No. 3, pp. 327-338.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Judge, David	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1999 Representation: theory and practice in Britain,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	New York: Routledge.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Kingdon, John W.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1989 Congressmen’s Voting Decisions, Ann Arbor: The	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	University of Michigan Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Leonard, R. L.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1968 Elections in Britain, N.J.: Van Nostrand.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Lijphart, Arend	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1971 “Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method”.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	The American Political Science Review, Vol. 65, No.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	3, pp. 682-693.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1982 “Comparative Perspectives on Fair Representation:	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	The Plurality-Majority Role, Geographical	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Districting, and Alternative Electoral Arrangement”,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Representation and Redistricting Issues, Lexington	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Books, pp. 143-159.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Loewenberg, Gerhard	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1988 Comparing Legislatures, Lanham, MD: University Press	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	of America.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Loewenberg, Gerhard, and Samuel C. Patterson	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1979 Comparing Legislatures, Lanham, MD: University Press	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	of America.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Lublin, David	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 The Paradox of Representation: Racial Gerrymandering	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	and Minority Interests in Congress, Princeton, N.J.:	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Princeton University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Lyons, Michael, and Peter F. Galderisi	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1995 “Incumbency, Reapportionment, and U. S. House	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Redistricting”, Political Research Quarterly, Vol.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	48, No.4, pp. 857-871.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Manin, Bernard	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 The principles of representative government,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Mayhew, David R.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1974 Congress: The Electoral Connection, New Haven: Yale	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	McKay, David H., and Samuel C. Patterson	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1971 “Population Equality and the Distribution of Seats	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	in the British House of Commons”, Comparative	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Politics, Vol. 4, No.1, pp. 59-76.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Mezey, Michael L.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1979 Comparative Legislatures, Durham, NC: Duke University	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Niemi, Richard G. , Bernard Grofman, Carl Carlucci, and Thomas Hofeller	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1990 “Measuring Compactness and the Role of a Compatness	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Standard in the Test for Partisan Gerrymandering”,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	The Journal of Politics, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 1155-	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1181.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Norris, Pippa	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1997 “Choosing Electoral System: Proportional,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Majoritarian and Mixed System”, International	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Political Science Review, Vol.18, No.3, pp. 297-312.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	O’Rourke, Timothy G.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1980 The Impact of Reapportionment, New Jersey:	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Transaction.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Pitkin, Hanna	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1967 The Concept of Representation, Berkeley: University	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	of California Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1969 “The Concept of Representation”, Representation,	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	New York: Atherton Press, pp. 1-23.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Pomper, Gerald M., and Susan S. Lederman	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1980 Elections in America: control and influence in	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	democratic politics, New York: Dodd, Mead.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Reock, Earnest C., Jr.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1961 “Measuring Compactness as a Requirement of	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Legislative Apportionment”, Midwest Journal of	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Political Science, Vol. 5, pp. 70-74.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Roche, John P., and Leonard W. Levy	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1964 The Congress, New York: Harcourt, Brace& World.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Rossiter, D. J., R. J. Johnston and C. J. Pattie	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1999 The Boundary Commissions, Manchester: Manchester	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Rush, Mark E.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1994 “Gerrymandering: Out of the Political Thicket and	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Into the Quagmire”, Political Science and	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Politics, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 682-685.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	2000 Does Redistricting Make a Difference? , MD: Lexington	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Books.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Saloma, John S.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1969 Congress and New Politics, Boston: Little Brown.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Smith, F. B.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1966 The Making of the Second Reform Bill, Cambridge:	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Cambridge University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Squire, Peverill	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1985 “Result of Partisan Redistricting in Seven U.S.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	States during the 1970’s”, Legislative Studies	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Quarterly, Vol. 10., No. 2., pp. 259-266.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Taagepera, Rein, and Matthew Soberg Shugart	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1989 Seats and Votes: The Effect and Determinants of	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Electoral System, New Haven, CT: Yale University	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Vogler, David J.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1977 The Politics of Congress, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Weiner, Myron, and Ergun Ozbudun	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1987 Competitive elections in developing	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	countries,Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Young, H. Peyton	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1988 “Measuring the Compactness of Legislative	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Districts”, Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	13, pp. 105-115.	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	Young, Roland	zh_TW
dc.relation.reference	1958 The American Congress, New York: Harper＆ Row.	zh_TW
item.fulltext	With Fulltext	-
item.languageiso639-1	en_US	-
item.openairetype	thesis	-
item.openairecristype	http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec	-
item.grantfulltext	open	-
item.cerifentitytype	Publications	-
Appears in Collections:	學位論文

Files in This Item:

File	Size	Format
52013101.pdf	250.23 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013102.pdf	251.5 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013103.pdf	259.76 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013104.pdf	255.25 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013105.pdf	259.24 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013106.pdf	298.37 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013107.pdf	311.69 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013108.pdf	945.27 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013109.pdf	363.69 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013110.pdf	261.78 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013111.pdf	295.88 kB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open
52013112.pdf	1.85 MB	Adobe PDF2	View/Open

Show simple item record

Google Scholar^TM

Check

Files in This Item:

Google ScholarTM

Google Scholar^TM