정책영역별로 본 국회 양극화

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 국회 양극화 현상이 정치(대북/외교), 경제, 사회 중 어느 영역에서 집중되어 나타나고 있는지 알아보는 것을 목적으로 한다. 또한, 초선의원들에 의한 교체효과와 선수가 높아지면서 나타나는 적응효과가 정책영역별로 동일하게 나타나고 있는지 알아보았다. 이를 위해 제16대 국회부터 제19대 국회까지 의원들의 이념을 정치, 경제, 사회분야로 나누어 비교해 보며, 선수에 따른 차이가 있는지 알아보았다. 분석을 통해 국회의 양극화는 다선의원들의 적응효과, 그리고 초선의원들의 대체효과를 통해 나타나고 있는데 이러한 경향은 정책 영역별로 구분해 살펴보았을 때 경제영역에서의 예외는 있지만, 정책 영역별 교체효과와 적응효과를 발견할 수 있었다. 한편, 국회의 양극화 현상은 비례대표 의원들에 의해 완화될 것이라 기대해 보았지만, 전혀 그렇지 못하다는 점을 알 수 있었다. 이러한 점에서 양극화 현상은 정당의 공천과 깊은 관련이 있다고 말할 수 있다. 한국의 정당들이 정책을 통해 이념적 선명성을 강조함으로써 그들이 지지자들을 결집하려는 모습을 보이려고 한다면 제20대 국회 두 정당 간 이념 차이는 더욱 커지게 될 것이다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study examines policy attitude of legislators to know whether which policy area more contributes to polarization of the National Assembly among economical, social, and political area. Likewise, it tests whether polarization of policy attitude is influenced by replacement effect and adaptation effect. In doing so, the study compares legislators’ ideology by classifying political, social and economical area from the 16th National Assembly to the 19th National Assembly. In addition, the study examines whether policy attitude of legislators is differentiated by terms. Results show that the replacement effect and the adaptation effect are found in policy attitude of legislators. The study finds that the proportional representative system does not moderate polarization of the National Assembly. The results indicate that polarization of the National Assembly is associated with the nomination of political party. An ideology gap between two parties in the 20th National Assembly is widened if political parties attempt to gather their supporters by emphasizing ideological clearness of political party.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 요약
• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 양극화 현상에 대한 기존 연구 검토
• Ⅲ. 한국 국회에 대한 분석
• Ⅳ. 결론을 대신하여
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이내영, "한국사회 이념갈등의 원인: 국민들의 양극화인가, 정치엘리트들의 양극화인가?" 한국정당학회 10 (10): 251-287, 2011

2 윤성이, "한국사회 이념갈등의 실체와 변화" 세종연구소 12 (12): 163-182, 2006

3 가상준, "한국 국회는 양극화되고 있는가?" 한국의정연구회 9 (9): 247-272, 2014

4 이현출, "한국 국민의 이념성향: 특성과 변화" 한국정치학회 39 (39): 321-343, 2005

5 강원택, "제19대 국회의원의 이념 성향과 정책 태도" 한국의회발전연구회 18 (18): 5-38, 2012

6 Adams, James, "Who Moves? Elites and mass-level depolarization in Britain, 1987-2001" 31 (31): 643-655, 2012

7 Hill, Kevin A., "What Happened to the Democrats in the South?: US House Elections, 1992-1996" 6 (6): 5-22, 2000

8 Fleisher, Richard, "The Shrinking Middle in the US Congress" 34 : 429-451, 2004

9 Rae, Douglas W., "The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws" Yale University Press 1967

10 Abramowitz, Alan I., "The Polarized Public?: Why American Government is So Dysfunctional" Pearson 2013

11 Jacobson, Gary C, "The 1994 House Elections In Perspective" 111 (111): 203-223, 1996

12 Taagepera, Rein, "Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems" Yale University Press 1989

13 Carson, Jamie L., "Redistricting and Party Polarization in the U.S. House of Representatives" 35 (35): 878-904, 2007

14 Roberts, Jason M., "Procedural Contexts, Party Strategy, and Conditional Party Voting in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1971-2000" 47 (47): 305-317, 2003

15 Brady, David W., "Primary Elections and Candidate Ideology: Out of Step with the Primary Electorate?" 32 (32): 79-105, 2007

16 Fiorina, Morris P., "Political Polarization in the American Public" 11 (11): 563-588, 2008

17 Fleisher, Richard, "Polarized Politics: Does it Matter?" CQ Press 2000

18 Jacobson, Gary C., "Polarized Politics: Congress and the President in a Partisan Era" Congressional Quarterly Inc 2000

19 McCarty, Nolan, "Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches" MIT Press 2006

20 Fiorina, Morris P., "Polarization in the American Public: Misconceptions and Misreadings" 70 (70): 556-560, 2008

21 Theriault, Sean. M, "Party polarization in the U.S. Congress: Member Replacement and Member Adaptation" 12 (12): 483-503, 2006

22 Theriault, Sean. M., "Party Polarization in Congress" Cambridge University Press 2008

23 Layman, Geoffrey C., "Party Polarization and Conflict Extension in the American Electorate" 46 (46): 786-802, 2002

24 Bartels, Larry. M, "Partisanship and Voting Behavior, 1952-1996" 44 (44): 35-50, 2000

25 Rohde, David W., "Parties and Leaders in the Postreform House" The University of Chicago Press 1991

26 McElwain, Kenneth M, "Manipulating Electoral Rules to Manufacture Single-Party Dominance" 52 (52): 32-47, 2008

27 Abramowitz, Alan I., "Is Polarization a Myth?" 70 (70): 542-555, 2008

28 Garand, James C, "Income Inequality, Party Polarization, and Roll-Call Voting in the U.S. Senate" 72 (72): 1109-1128, 2010

29 Abramowitz, Alan I., "Ideological Realignment in the U.S. Electorate" 60 (60): 634-652, 1998

30 Adams, James, "Has the British Public Depolarized Along with Political Elites? An American Perspective on British Public Opinion" 45 (45): 507-530, 2012

31 Farrell, David M., "Electoral Systems: A Comparative Introduction" Palgrave 2001

32 Liphart, Arend, "Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945-1990" Oxford University Press 1990

33 Fiorina, Morris P., "Culture War?: The Myth of a Polarized America" Pearson Longman 2004

34 Burden, Barry C, "Candidate Positioning in US Congressional Elections" 34 (34): 211-227, 2004

35 Lee, Madelaine, "Are British political Parties converging at the Centre Ground?" 9 : 250-286, 2013

36 Green, Jane, "A Test of Core Vote Theories: The British Conservatives, 1997-2005" 41 (41): 735-764, 2011