分立政府與低收入戶家庭生活扶助：1996至2012年臺灣經驗的實證分析

Divided Government and Government Subsidies for Low Household Income Families: The Taiwan Experiences, 1996-2012

近年來，我國中央層級與多數地方層級政府皆已面臨「分立政府」（divided government）的問題。2000年總統大選民進黨贏得勝選，取得中央政府執政權，台灣首次進行政黨輪替，並產生分立政府的體制型態。無論就地方或中央層級而言，行政首長與立法部門所構成的府會結構型態，是否為同一政黨掌控抑或分屬不同政黨，其所隱含的府會關係、施政表現與領導效能，亦逐漸成為國內學者關注的議題。關於分立政府是否影響社會福利制度的推動與社會福利預算支出，迄今仍是西方學界爭議的焦點之一。本研究以我國中央政府為分析對象，比較1996年至2000年國民黨執政的「一致政府」（unified government）時期、2000年至2008年民進黨執政的分立政府時期，以及2008年至2012年國民黨執政的一致政府時期，我國低收入戶家庭生活扶助預算支出（作為社會福利的一項測量指標）是否具有顯著差異。變數檢定與實證結果顯示，平均每人國內生產毛額、失業率、分立政府，以及總統選舉年等變數，對於低收入戶家庭生活扶助的預算支出具有顯著影響。就政府體制的影響來說，本文推論，相對於一致政府，分立政府較不利於低收入階層的照顧。質言之，國家社會福利的推動必須仰仗行政權與立法權的相互協力配合，一旦兩者呈現對立局面，往往無法透過集體合作達成社會資源「重分配政策」（redistributive policies）。在結論中，本文摘述實證分析要點，並提出研究限制與未來研究方向。

Divided government exists where different political parties control the executive and legislative branches in a political sys­tem. This has become a common feature of Taiwan’s national and local political landscape. For one, the Democratic Progres­sive Party won the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections and ac­quired the ruling power over the central government, while the Kuomintang still controlled the majority of the Legislative Yuan. When there is divided government, since different political par­ties control the executive and legislative branches, the operation of party government is weakened, as the two political institutions are in conflict with each other. This certainly makes responsible and efficient government an unattain­able goal. However, the question concerning the consequence of divided government—are the social welfare system and the coun­try´s social welfare spending became less well under divided party control?—remains contentious. This study explores this re­lationship by comparing the government subsidies for low house­hold income families (by the indicators of 'social welfare spend­ing＂) under the DPP-led divided government (2000-2008) with subsidies under two periods of the Kuomintang-led unified gov­ernment (1996-2000 and 2008-2012). It is hypothesized that the policy-making under unified governments tends to be conducive to social welfare spending while policy gridlocks under divided governments tend to have a negative impact. The findings reveal that gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, unemployment rate, divided government, and presidential election year are statistical­ly significant determinants on the expenditures for the govern­ment subsidies for low household income families. This study concludes that divided government should be an important issue of studying the public policy and social welfare, deserving further academic attention from a comparative perspective.