有关两院制与美国首都政经分离的思辨 往往涉及地缘、选举/官员任命、权力制衡，如何机会平等与多样性 etc 1. 两院制参议权各州等值 -> Connecticut Compromise = Great Compromise of 1787 2. 众议院发起总统/最高法院大法官的弹劾，由参议院主持审判 3. 参议院行使由总统提名的内阁官员、最高法院大法官等同意权 4. 联邦政府采政经分离制，不少州层级仍可看到这个规划精神 在台湾鲜少讨论 200 多年前美国开国元勳的观点 但今天台湾遇到的不少问题，都是几百年前这些讨论就可以预见到的。 (以下直接 google 翻译可能会有些许失真，建议看原文) 想说顺便记录下来发在本版 THE RECORDS OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787 档案来源：美国国会图书馆 Volume 2 https://www.loc.gov/resource/llscdam.llfr002/?sp=1&st=grid #Page 42 Mr Mason. The mode of appointing the Judges may depend in some degree on the mode of trying impeachments, of the Executive. If the Judges were to form a tribunal for that purpose, they surely ought not to be appointed by the Executive. There were insuperable objections besides agst. referring the appointment to the Executive. He mentioned as one, that as the seat of Govt. must be in some one State, and the Executive would remain in office for a considerable time, for 4, 5, or 6 years at least he would insensibly form local & personal attachments within the particular State that would deprive equal merit elsewhere, of an equal chance of promotion. Mason 先生 法官的任命方式可能在某种程度上取决於弹劾行政官员的审判方式。 如果法官要组成一个用於此目的的法院，那麽他们肯定不应该由行政官员任命。 除了将任命权交给行政部门之外，还有其他无法克服的反对意见。 他提到了其中一个理由，即由於政府所在地必须位於某个州， 而且行政官员将在任相当长一段时间，至少 4 年、5 年或 6 年， 他将不可避免地对特定州内的地方和个人产生依恋， 这将剥夺其他地方同样优秀的人获得晋升的机会。 #Page 42 Mr. Ghorum. As the Executive will be responsible in point of character at least, for a judicious and faithful discharge of his trust, he will be careful to look through all the States for proper characters. — The Senators will be as likely to form their attachments at the seat of Govt where they reside, as the Executive. If they can not get the man of the particular State to which they may respectively belong, they will be indifferent to the rest. Ghorum 先生 (Nathaniel Gorham) 由於行政官员至少在品行方面要为公正和忠诚地履行职责负责， 因此他会仔细审视所有州的合适人选。 参议员在政府所在地任职期间，就像行政官员一样，更容易和当地的 (官员) 建立依附 关系。 如果他们得不到自己所属州的人选，他们对其他州的人选将会漠不关心。 #Page 127 Mr. Gerry conceived it to be the genel. sense of America, that neither the Seat of a State Govt. nor any large commercial City should be the seat of the Genl. Govt. Gerry 先生 (Elbridge Gerry) 整个美国的普遍看法是，联邦政府的所在地不应该是任何一个州政府的所在地， 也不应该是任何大型商业城市。 #Page 128 Mr. Butler was for fixing (by the Constitution) the place, & a central one, (for the seat of the Natl Govt) Butler 先生 (Pierce Butler) 在宪法中确定国家政府所在地，并且这个地点应该位於中心位置。 Volume 1 https://www.loc.gov/item/11005506/ #Page 200 The greater States Sir are naturally as unwilling to have their property left in the disposition of the smaller, as the smaller are to have theirs in the disposition of the greater. An honorable gentleman has, to avoid this difficulty, hinted a proposition of equalizing the States. It appears to me an equitable one, and Ishould, for my own part, not be against such a measure, if it might be found practicable. Formerly, indeed, when almost every province had adifferent Constitu- tion, some with greater others with fewer privileges, it was of importance to the borderers when their boundaries were con-tested, whether by running the division lines, they were placed on one side or the other. At present when such dif- ferences are done away, it is less material. The Interest of aState is made up of the interests of its individual members. If they are not injured, the State is not injured. Smal. States are more easily well & happily governed than large ones! If therefore in such an equal division, it should be found nec- essary to diminish Pennsylvania, Ishould not be averse to the giving apart of it to N. Jersey, and another to Delaware. But as there would probably be considerable difficulties in adjust-ing such adivision; and however equally made at first, it would be continually varying by the augumentation of inhabitants in some States, and their [more] 8 fixed proportion in others; and thence frequent occasion for new divisions, Ibeg leave to pro- pose for the consideration of the Committee another mode which appears to me to be as equitable, more easily carried into practice, and more permanent in its nature. Let the weakest State say what proportion of money or force it is able and willing to furnish for the general purposes of the Union. Let all the others oblige themselves to furnish each an equal proportion. The whole of these joint supplies to be absolutely in the disposition of Congress. The Congress in this case to be composed of an equal num-ber of Delegates from each State: nd their decisions to be by the majority of individual members voting. If these joint and equal supplies should on particular occa- sions not be sufficient, Let Congress make requisitions on the richer and more powerful States for farther aids, to be volun-tarily afforded, leaving to each State the right of considering the necessity and utility of the aid desired, and of giving more or less as it should be found proper. 各位尊敬的阁下，规模较大的州自然不愿意将财产交由较小的州支配， 就如同较小的州也不愿意将财产交由规模较大的州支配一样。 一位可敬的绅士为了避免这个难题，暗示了一个均衡各州权力的提议。 在我看来，这是一个公正的提议，我个人并不反对这样的措施，如果它是可行的。 过去，的确几乎每个州都拥有不同的宪法，有些拥有较多的特权，有些则较少。 因此，当边界受到争议时，边境居民就很在意分界线後他们会被划入哪一边。 而现在，由於这些差异已经消失，这就没那麽重要了。 一个州的利益是由其个别成员的利益所组成的。如果他们没有受到伤害， 州就没有受到伤害。规模小的州比规模大的州更容易实现良好和幸福的治理！ 因此，如果在这样的平等分配中，发现有必要缩小宾夕法尼亚州的规模， 我并不反对将它的一部分划给新泽西州，另一部分划给德拉瓦州。 但是，调整这样的划分可能会带来相当大的困难；即使一开始划分得再公平， 它也会随着一些州人口的增加以及其他州人口的相对固定比例而不断变化， 从而导致频繁需要新的划分。因此，我冒昧地向委员会提出另一种模式供其考虑， 在我看来，这种模式更加公正，更容易实施，而且更具持久性。 让实力最弱的州说出它愿意且能够为联州的整体目的提供的资金或兵力比例。 让所有其他州承诺各自提供相同的比例。 所有这些联合供应的绝对支配权属於国会。 在这种情况下，国会由来自每个州数量相同的代表组成， 他们的决定由个别成员投票的多数票产生。 如果这些联合和均等的供应在特定情况下不足，国会可以向富裕和强大的州 提出进一步援助的要求，这些援助将是自愿提供的，每个州都有权考虑 所要求援助的必要性和实用性，并根据需要提供更多或更少援助。 -- 社群理念 首都设中部，社会住宅盖中南部 https://www.facebook.com/NCPBTW/ 首都机能移转计划 New Capital Plan for Better Taiwan --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc), 来自: 59.127.124.8 (台湾) ※ 文章网址: https://webptt.com/cn.aspx?n=bbs/Geography/M.1717684388.A.B77.html ※ 编辑: ckTHU (59.127.124.8 台湾), 06/06/2024 22:48:25 ※ ckTHU:转录至看板 Urban_Plan 06/13 14:50