第七屆金門縣長選舉選民投票行為之研究

A Study on the Voting Behavior of the Electorate in the 7th Kinmen County Magistrate Election

10.6712/JCPA.202106_(28).0007

王宏男(Hung-Nan Wang)

金門 ； 縣長選舉 ； 投票行為 ； Kinmen ； County Magistrate Election ； Voting Behavior

中華行政學報

28期（2021 / 06 / 30）

134 - 152

繁體中文

台灣走向民主化，於1992年開放地方縣市長選舉後，金門陳姓、李姓已在地方上執政長達25年，本研究動機即第七屆縣長選舉楊姓如何突破地方宗族枷鎖？透過文獻分析法與調查訪談法，訪談金門政界及商界15位具代表姓人物，蒐集第一屆至第七屆《金門縣選舉實錄》相關選舉數據，最後與調查訪談結果做比對，並對研究結果提出解釋。研究將從2018年12月25日至2021年4月1日，二年又四個月。以回答四個問題，首先陳系、李系在地方上的派系是否會因楊氏當選第七屆縣長而消失？第二，台灣縣市長與金門縣長選舉的差異？第三，比較前七屆縣長選舉尋找一普遍性通則；第四，單一選區相對多數決在金門縣長選舉是否有利於大黨？研究發現，首先，選舉數據與訪談資料相吻合。楊姓與李姓利益結盟，楊姓在第七屆縣長選舉繼承李姓選舉板塊，且陳系在選舉板塊並未土崩瓦解，未來陳姓仍會透過宗族的內部初選機制，循著過去的足跡，持續推派候選人參加縣長選舉。次則，政黨在金門的力量或功能已日漸式微，不同於台灣各縣市政黨扮演積極的角色與功能。資料蒐集顯示陳姓與李姓宗族具有「初選制度」，取代政黨提名候選人及政治動員的功能。第三，從第一屆至第七屆《金門縣選舉實錄》比較得知，地區投票率不斷下降，競選人數以第六屆為最，性別比例在37位候選人中僅2位女性，地區人口數、選舉人數與投票數則呈現遞增狀態。第四，單一選區相對多數決制度無助於大黨在金門政治活動。最後金門選民投票行為難逃宗族枷鎖，建議「不在籍投票」或許是破除地方宗族派系的另一種選擇，但涉及到既得利益者，且朝野兩黨立場與方向不明，僅供後續研究參考。

In 1992, Kinmen was included for the first time in the Taiwanese local elections for city mayors and county magistrates, which marked an important milestone for the democratization of Taiwan. Since then, the Chen and Li clans had held power in Kinmen for 25 years. This study aims to explore how the Yang clan broke the local predominance of the Chen and Li clans to win the 7th Kinmen County Magistrate Election. The literature review and survey interviewing methods were adopted, with 15 representative figures from the political and business circles in Kinmen interviewed and relevant election data collected from the Kinmen County Election Records for the first through seventh elections. Finally, the data were compared with the survey results, and the results of the study were explicated. The study lasted from December 25, 2018 to April 1, 2021, spanning a total of two years and four months. This study attempted to answer the following four questions. First, will the local factions associated with the Chen and Li clans disappear due to Yang's election as the 7th county magistrate? Second, what is the difference between the mayor/magistrate elections on the main island of Taiwan and that in Kinmen?Three, what general principle can be derived from the previous seven county magistrate elections? Finally, Will Single non-transferable vote (SNTV) election of the prefect of Kinmen benefit the big party? This study has reached the following findings. First, the election data corresponded to the interview data. The Yang and Li clans allied for common interest. The Yang candidate took over the electoral support for the Li clan in the 7th county magistrate election. In the meantime, the Chen clan retained their share of the vote. In the future, the Chen clan will still follow the traditional path, nominating candidates for the county magistrate election through the clan's internal primary election mechanism. Second, the power or function of political parties has been gradually declining in Kinmen, unlike the active role or function political parties serve in counties and cities on the main island of Taiwan. According to the data collected, the Chen and Li clans implement a ＂primary election system＂, which performs the functions of candidate nomination and political mobilization generally carried out by political parties. Finally, a comparison of the Kinmen County Election Records for the first through seventh elections reveals the following: the regional voter turnout has been on the decrease; the sixth election had the greatest number of candidates; in terms of the gender ratio, only two out of the 37 candidates were female; the size of regional population, the number of electors, and the number of votes have been on the increase; Fourth, Single non-transferable vote (SNTV) election does not help the political activities of big parties in Kinmen. Finally, as the voting behavior of the Kinmen electorate is still subject to the predominance of local clans and factions, this study suggests adopting the ＂absentee ballot＂ as a possible alternative method to break through such shackles. However, elections involve vested interest groups, and the ruling and opposition parties show indefinite positions and directions. As such, the results of this study simply serve as a reference for follow-up research.

1. 吳重禮(2002)。SNTV 的省思－弊端肇因或是代罪羔羊？。問題與研究，3
   連結：
2. 廖益興(2006)。台灣選民投票參與行為的研究。中華行政學報，3
   連結：
3. 金門日報 https://www.kmdn.gov.tw/。
4. 中央選舉委員會 http://www.cec.gov.tw/。
5. Hsieh, John Fuh-sheng,Neiemi, Richard G.(1999).Can Duverger’s Law Be Extended to SNTV? The Case of Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan Election.Electoral studies,18,101-116.
6. Merriam, Sharan B.,顏寧（譯）(2009).質性研究：設計與施作指南.五南.
7. 中央選舉委員會(1987).各國憲法選舉制度輯要.中央選舉委員會.
8. 王宏男(2020)。東海大學。
9. 王振漢(2007)。台北，銘傳大學。
10. 王業立(2001).比較選舉制度.五南出版社.
11. 王業立(1996).我國選舉制度的政治影響.台北:五南.
12. 王瑞嘉(2012)。東海大學。
13. 呂成發(2003)。台北，銘傳大學。
14. 呂亞力(2000).政治學方法論.台北市:三民書局.
15. 林焜熿(2007).金門志.金門縣政府.
16. 林騰鷂(2017).中華民國憲法概要.台北:三民書局.
17. 金門縣選舉委員會(1998).金門縣選舉實錄.福建省金門縣選舉委員會.
18. 金門縣選舉委員會(2005).金門縣選舉實錄.金門縣選舉委員會.
19. 金門縣選舉委員會(2018).福建省金門縣 107 年地方公職人員選舉及全國性公民投票選舉實錄.金門縣選舉委員會.
20. 金門縣選舉委員會(2014).金門縣選舉實錄.金門縣選舉委員會.
21. 金門縣選舉委員會(2001).金門縣選舉實錄.福建省金門縣選舉委員會.
22. 金門縣選舉委員會(1994).金門縣選舉實錄.福建省金門縣選舉委員會.
23. 金門縣選舉委員會(2009).金門縣選舉實錄.金門縣選舉委員會.
24. 許世英(1959).新金門志.金門縣政府.
25. 許金土(2003)。台北，銘傳大學。
26. 郭銘峰,王業立（編）(2010).政治學.台北:晶典.
27. 陳宏義(2005)。台北，東吳大學政治研究所。
28. 陳佳吉(2014)。國防大學政治作戰學院。
29. 陳建民,李能慧,呂怡艷(2005)。金門地區選民投票行為之研究-從總統、立法委員和縣長的選舉結果分析。國立金門技術學院學報
30. 楊泰順(1991).選舉.台北:永然圖書公司.
31. 楊國樞(1989).社會及行為科學研究法.台北市:三民書局.
32. 楊國樞（編）(1989).社會及行為科學研究法.台北市:三民書局.
33. 葉至誠,葉立誠(2001).研究方法與論文寫作.台北市:商鼎文化出版社.
34. 葉鈞培(1999).金門姓氏堂號與燈號.金門縣金城鎮:金門縣政府.
35. 趙永茂(1989)。地方派系與選舉之關係：一個概念架構的分析。中山社會科學季刊，4(3)
36. 劉文仕(2011)。台北市，中國文化大學中山學術研究所。
37. 謝復生(1992).政黨比例代表制.臺北:理論與政策雜誌.

1. (2024)。宗族社會下政治版圖變動之調查研究：以1994-2022年金門縣長選舉為例。中華行政學報，34，97-125。