中國國民黨及民主進步黨區域立委與自由民主黨眾議院區域議員提名制度之比較研究

中國國民黨、民主進步黨提名區域立委候選人，自由民主黨眾議院區域議員提名候選人時，經過不同的黨内提名過程。國民黨兼用「民意調查」和「黨員投票」，民進黨採取全民調。自民黨方面，一方面堅持現任者優先之原則，一方面企圖黨内提名制度的改革，在有些選區舉行「公募（kobo）」提名候選人。本研究關注，三黨現任者在提名制度中的優勢，以及中央黨部和地方黨部之間的權力互動關係。本研究依據文獻回顧，以及受訪者之回答内容進行比較分析。研究發現，國民黨籍現任者在黨内初選當中維持相當的優勢情況，挑戰者取代現任者獲得提名的例子也並不多。民進黨現任者在全民調初選中，雖然有一定程度的現任者優勢，不過因爲有全民調初選的影響，還有選民非常重視選區服務的關係，地方議員有機會取代現任立委獲得提名。自民黨方面，現任者優先原則相當堅固，新人挑戰者難以獲得提名。非現任選區或現任者表明引退的選區部分，不少自民黨地方黨部經過公募選擇候選人，不過依據自民黨籍受訪者的表明，黨内有意見懷疑經過公募選出來的候選人之表現。關於中央黨部和地方黨部之間的權力互動關係方面，國民黨以及自民黨地方黨部作爲提名建議黨部，負責制定提名詳細運作、黨内協調以及候選人選定等過程。雖然最終決定權屬於中央黨部，但地方黨部基本上掌握高度的權力。可看見傳統政黨黨内中的地方分權化。民進黨方面中央黨部掌握較多的權力，負責制定規則、決定民調公司候選名單、進行黨内協調以及舉行民調等過程。根據民進黨籍受訪者的回答内容，在民進黨内，中央黨部的協調比地方黨部更有效果。

關鍵字

立法委員；提名制度；黨内初選；競爭；分權

並列摘要

This thesis examines the selection methods of legislator candidates through a comparative study between Kuomintang (KMT), Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). The KMT uses both “polling primary” and "party member voting," while the DPP adopts mainly “polling primary.” The LDP on the one hand adheres to the principle of priority for incumbents and attempts to reform the party's nomination system by holding "kobo" to nominate candidates in certain electoral districts. This research focuses on the advantages of incumbents during the CSMs and the power interaction between the central and local party headquarters. Analysis in this comparative study is based on cross-examinations of literature reviews and in-depth interviews. Research indicates that incumbents of the KMT nationality maintain a considerable advantage in the party's primary elections, with few examples of the challengers replacing the incumbents in nominations. Although the incumbents of the DPP hold a certain degree of advantage in the primary elections of the polls, due to the influence of the poll and the fact that voters attach great importance to constituency services, local council members still have the opportunity to replace the incumbents. In terms of the LDP, the priority for incumbents remains quite strong, making it difficult for new challengers to get nominated. In the non-current electoral districts or the constituencies where incumbents indicate their retirement, some LDP constituencies nominate candidates through the public offering system; however, according to the LDP interviewees, performances of the candidates elected through public offerings receive doubts by some members of the party. Regarding the power interaction between the central party headquarters and the local party headquarters, the KMT and the local party headquarters of the LDP act as nomination recommendations to the party headquarters, responsible for the detailed operation of the nomination, coordination within the party, and the selection of candidates. Although the final decision is ultimately made by the central party department, the local party department holds considerable authority. The decentralization within the traditional party is apparent. For the DPP, the central party headquarters holds more power and is responsible for formulating rules, deciding the candidate list of polling companies, coordinating within the party, and holding polling primary. According to the DPP interviewees, within the party, coordinations initiated by the central party headquarters prove to be more effective than the local party headquarters.