本文選題：“內部改進” + 國家構建��； 參考：《南開大學》2010年博士論文

【摘要】：“內部改進”(internal improvement,美國早期時人稱呼交通建設的用語)是美國早期政治和經濟生活中一件引人注目的大事。在1801-1833年間,美國歷屆總統(tǒng)和國會圍繞全國“內部改進”體系產生了持久而激烈的爭論。本文試圖從國家構建的角度對有關爭論以及聯(lián)邦政府的“內部改進”政策進行考察和分析。 本文認為,圍繞全國“內部改進”體系的激烈爭論與美國早期的國家構建問題有著密切的關聯(lián),在很大程度上反映了當時的政治精英關于如何構建國家的重大分歧。爭論各方絕大多數(shù)贊成聯(lián)邦政府主持建設全國“內部改進”體系,因為他們認識到,這是鞏固美利堅聯(lián)盟國家的重要手段。但是,在憲法沒有明確授予聯(lián)邦政府進行“內部改進”的權力的情況下,聯(lián)邦政府能否進行“內部改進”?這一問題成為各方爭論的核心問題。不可否認,在很多情況下,爭論各方會出于地方主義的考慮而支持或反對全國“內部改進”體系,進而對上述問題做出肯定或否定的回答。但是,從各位美國總統(tǒng)和國會議員的言論中,可以看出,他們對憲法授予聯(lián)邦政府的權力范圍、對憲法的解釋和聯(lián)邦制的理解、以及聯(lián)邦政府的權力能否擴大、以什么方式擴大等問題的關注是壓倒性的、真誠的,這些問題是爭論各方產生分歧的焦點。對這些問題的關注表明爭論各方具有不同的國家理念和主張,對于如何構建美利堅國家意見紛呈�？梢哉f,關于國家構建的重大分歧是引起各方爭論不休、并對聯(lián)邦政府的“內部改進”政策產生重要影響的關鍵因素。 本文分別對1812年戰(zhàn)爭前聯(lián)邦政府“內部改進”政策的延滯、戰(zhàn)后麥迪遜總統(tǒng)對《紅利法案》的否決、門羅總統(tǒng)執(zhí)政期間聯(lián)邦政府關于“內部改進”的大辯論、以及小亞當斯和杰克遜總統(tǒng)執(zhí)政時期聯(lián)邦政府“內部改進”政策的起伏等進行考察和分析,進而揭示美國早期政治精英關于如何構建國家的重大分歧。綜觀1801-1833年間聯(lián)邦政府圍繞全國“內部改進”體系的激烈爭論,可以看出,在這一時期,面對聯(lián)邦政府能否在“內部改進”事宜上擴大其權力這一問題,總統(tǒng)和國會議員意見紛呈。歸納起來,爭論各方大致有三種構建國家的思路：一、主張“寬泛解釋”,認為聯(lián)邦政府根據(jù)憲法享有廣泛的管理關乎“共同防務和公共福利”事務的權力,主張建立一個權力相對集中的聯(lián)邦制國家；二、主張通過憲法修正案的方式授予聯(lián)邦政府必要的權力,有限度地擴大聯(lián)邦制國家的權力,同時,反對“寬泛解釋”,以防止聯(lián)邦政府藉此逐漸集中權力并發(fā)展成為一個集權國家；三、主張“嚴格解釋”,認為聯(lián)邦政府只享有憲法中明確列舉的少數(shù)有限的權力,反對聯(lián)邦政府以任何方式擴大權力,主張建立權力受到嚴格限制的聯(lián)邦/邦聯(lián)國家。在1801-1833年間聯(lián)邦政府圍繞“內部改進”的激烈爭論中,三種構建國家的思路相互碰撞、競爭和博弈,并對聯(lián)邦政府的“內部改進”政策產生重要影響。 從1801-1833年間聯(lián)邦政府圍繞全國“內部改進”體系的激烈爭論以及相關政策中,可以管窺美國早期國家構建的復雜而曲折的進程。
[Abstract]:"Internal improvement" (internal improvement) is an important event in the early political and economic life of the United States. During the 1801-1833 years, the president and Congress of the United States had a long and intense debate around the national "internal improvement" system. This article tried to build from the state. This paper examines and analyzes the debates and the federal government's internal improvement policy.
This paper holds that the fierce debate around the national "internal improvement" system is closely related to the problem of the early state construction in the United States. To a great extent, it reflects the major differences of the political elite at that time on how to build the country. The overwhelming majority of the arguments in the dispute agree with the federal government to host the national "internal improvement" system. For them, it is an important means to consolidate the United States of the United States. But, when the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power of "internal improvement" to the federal government, can the federal government make an "internal improvement"? This issue has become the core of the debate. In many cases, there is no denying that the parties will be out of debate. To support or oppose the national "internal improvement" system in the context of localism, and to make positive or negative answers to the above questions. However, from the comments of the president and the congressman of the United States, they can see that they have the power of the constitution to the federal government, the interpretation of the Constitution and the understanding of the federalism, and the federal administration. The concerns of the enlargement and the expansion of the government are overwhelming and sincere. These issues are the focus of the disagreement between the parties. The big difference is a key factor that has caused controversy and has an important impact on the federal government's "internal improvement" policy.
This paper delaying the "internal improvement" policy of the federal government before the 1812 war, President Madison's rejection of the bonus bill after the war, the federal government's debate on "internal improvement" during President Monroe's administration, and the undulation of the "internal improvement" policy of the United States government during the period of President Adams and Jackson's administration. In this period, the president can see whether the federal government can expand its power in the "internal improvement" on the issue of whether the federal government can expand its power on "internal improvement" in the 1801-1833 years. And the opinions of the members of the national conference are in a large number. It is concluded that there are roughly three kinds of ideas to build the country. First, it advocates "broad interpretation," that the federal government enjoys the power to manage the affairs of "common defense and public welfare" in accordance with the constitution, and advocates the establishment of a relatively centralized federal state; and two. The amendment of the Constitution grants the federal government the power necessary to extend the power of the federal state to a limited extent, while opposing the "broad interpretation" to prevent the federal government from gradually focusing on power and developing into a centralized state; three, advocating a "strict explanation" that the federal government has only a clear list of the constitution. A few limited powers, opposing the federal government in any way to expand power, advocating the establishment of a federal / Confederation of Confederacy with strict power. In the 1801-1833 years of the federal government's fierce debate around "internal improvement", the three ideas of building countries collided, competition and game, and the "internal improvement" of the federal government. The policy has an important impact.
From the intense debate over the federal government 's "internal improvement" system over the past 1801-1833 years and related policies, we can see the complex and tortuous process of the early state of the United States.

【學位授予單位】：南開大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：K712

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 林廣;交通運輸與紐約城市發(fā)展(1820～1870)[J];城市問題;1997年04期

2 王續(xù)添;;地方主義、聯(lián)邦主義與新國家構建中的制度選擇——考察1910年代中國政治的一個視角[J];教學與研究;2007年04期

3 張玲蓉;試論19世紀美國交通革命[J];江西師范大學學報;2003年05期

4 劉祚昌;杰斐遜與美國現(xiàn)代化[J];歷史研究;1994年02期

5 李劍鳴;;“人民”的定義與美國早期的國家構建[J];歷史研究;2009年01期

6 任東來;美國早期憲政史上的聯(lián)邦法令廢止權[J];美國研究;2001年02期

7 王希;美國歷史上的“國家利益”問題[J];美國研究;2003年02期

8 姜德琪;略論美國西部開發(fā)中交通運輸條件之改善[J];青海師范大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2001年01期

9 李劍鳴;;歷史語境、史學語境與史料的解讀——以弗吉尼亞州批準美國憲法大會中一條材料的解讀為例[J];史學集刊;2007年05期

10 李劍鳴;;“共和”與“民主”的趨同——美國革命時期對“共和政體”的重新界定[J];史學集刊;2009年05期

，

本文編號：1797427