Political Nature of Confirmation Hearings in South Korea and the U. S.
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Confirmation hearings work in highly political ways both in South Korea and the U. S. The contrast can’t be made in terms that their working is political in one and non-political in the other country, while it can that the politics of congressional confirmation in the U. S. proceeds self-consciously whereas it does, partly at least, unconsciously in South Korea. Popular cynicism is prevalent in both societies against the partisanship in the confirmation politics. But not a few people appreciate the legitimating role of the institution in the U. S. while such an appreciative perspective is rarely found in South Korea. This paper tries to provide an outline of historical evolution of the institution in the two polities, with a view to elucidating what the political nature of the institution amounts to, and what different understandings of politics are involved in different responses to the institution in two countries.
Abstract
Confirmation hearings work in highly political ways both in South Korea and the U. S. The contrast can’t be made in terms that their working is political in one and non-political in the other country, while it can that the politics of congressional confirmation in the U. S. proceeds self-consciously whereas it does, partly at least, unconsciously in South Korea. Popular cynicism is prevalent in both societies against the partisanship in the confirmation politics. But not a few people appreciate the legitimating role of the institution in the U. S. while such an appreciative perspective is rarely found in South Korea. This paper tries to provide an outline of historical evolution of the institution in the two polities, with a view to elucidating what the political nature of the institution amounts to, and what different understandings of politics are involved in different responses to the institution in two countries.
참고문헌 (24)
- 김용훈, "인사청문회의 헌법적 의의와 제도적 개선 쟁점 - 미국의 경우를 참고하여 -", 미국헌법연구, 26(2), pp.1~45 (2015), 미국헌법학회
- 김일환, "미국 연방헌법상 인사청문회제도", 미국헌법연구, 21(3), pp.205~242 (2010), 미국헌법학회
- 박경미, "한국 국회의 청문회 제도의 특성과 쟁점", 동북아연구, 18, pp.93~126 (2010)[DOI]
- 이선우, "인사검증 및 인사청문회제도의 현황과 개선방안", 한국인사행정학회보, 12(1), pp.23~54 (2013), 한국인사행정학회
- 공직 후보자에 대한 국회 인사청문 결과 : 역대 정부별 비교와 함의, "전진영", 국회입법조사처, ~, pp.현안분석 제 190 호 (2021)
- Beth, Richard S, "Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress" (2013), Library of Congress
- Carey, Maeve P, "Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress" (2012), Library of Congress
- De Pauw, "Documentary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America , v. 2" (1972), Johns Hopkins University Press
- Green, Joshua, "The Strict Obstructionist", The Atlantic (2011)
- Heitshusen, Valerie, "Congressional Research Se rvice, CRS Report for Congress" (2017), Library of Congress
- Hume, David, "A Treatise of Human Nature" (1978)
- Macmahon, Arthur W, "First Session of the Seventy First Congress", American Political Science Review, 24(1), pp.38~59 (1930)
- Maer, Lucinda, "Parliamentary Involvement in Public Appointments" (2008), House of Commons Library
- "Pre appointment Hearings" (2017)[URL]
- Mascott, Jennifer L, "Who are ‘Officers of the United States", Stanford Law Review, 70(2), pp.443~564 (2018)
- Mill, John Stuart, "On Liberty. Collected Works of John Stuart Mill , vol. XVIII" (1977), University of Toronto Press
- Oakeshott, Michael, "신념과 의심의 정치학" (2015), 모티브북
- Perlstein, Rick, "Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America" (2008), Scribner
- "Committee on Appointment" (2022)[URL]
- Rutkus, Denis Steven, "Congressional Research Service , CRS Report for Congress" (2009), Library of Congress
- Rybicki, Elizabeth, "Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress" (2021), Library of Congress
- Salvadori, Massimo, "The Liberal Heresy: Origins and Historical Development" (1977), Palgrave Macmillan
- "Senate Obstructionism Handed a Raft of Judicial Vacancies to Trump, What Has He Done with Them?" (2018)[URL]