党的十六大报告提出的新思想

十六大报告在“七一”讲话创新的基础上 ,又有了新的发展 ,提出了许多新思想 ,主要包括 :全面贯彻“三个代表”的“关键在坚持与时俱进、核心在保持党的先进性、本质在坚持执政为民” ;“必须把发展作为执政兴国的第一要务” ;把“与时俱进”同“解放思想、实事求是”一起作为党的思想路线的基本内容 ;在新世纪我们遇到了一个求发展的“战略机遇期” ;在本世纪头二十年“基本实现工业化、大力推进信息化、加强建设现代化” ;“发展社会主义民主政治 ,建设社会主义政治文明” ;必须用“三个代表”重要思想统领社会主义文化建设 ;以改革精神推进党的建设 ,不断为党的肌体注入新活力。     

“三个代表”重要思想与共产党执政的合法性基础

"三个代表"重要思想通过先进生产力、先进文化、人民根本利益三大要素,全面深刻地揭示了马克思主义党执政的合法性的物质基础、思想基础和群众基础,从根本上回答了治党治国之道,反映了共产党执政的基本规律,是我们党艰辛探索和伟大实践的必然结论.     

"三个代表"重要思想与领导科学创新

"三个代表"重要思想是马克思主义领导理论的伟大创新,发展马克思主义领导科学必须坚持继承与发展的统一、理论与实践的统一、领导与群众的统一,必须牢牢把握执政党领导的规律.     

我国政党制度安全：挑战及对策

政党制度安全,就是指在特定的政党政治框架中,一国政党制度不存在危险或受到内外执政风险影响下仍能保持政党制度的巩固。在新的国际国内形势下,我国政党制度面临着前所未有的挑战:我国成为国际敌对势力“西化”的主要目标;苏联模式政党制度彻底瓦解,多党制在世界范围内不断扩展;信息传播全球化网络化,思想舆论环境日趋复杂;我国社会阶级阶层结构深刻变化,出现了多样化发展的趋势。面对压力和挑战,我们必须坚持中国共产党领导的多党合作制度不动摇;重新审视和定位中国共产党特别是各民主党派的代表性;提高政治协商制度的体制化水平;推进政治协商具体工作的规范化和制度化;大胆借鉴世界各国政党和政党制度建设的有益成果。     

论民行检察与人大的监督合力推进和谐社会发展

人民代表大会制度是我国的根本政治制度。向人大联系汇报,接受人大监督,是所有国家机关的法定义务。但在实际工作中,不少单位对此不够重视,很少用尽人大监督权。民事行政检察权是人民检察院行使法律监督权的一种。当前其监督的力度和效果也不明显。如何确保人大的核心地位？如何提高民事行政检察的法律监督能力？笔者认为,在现今条件下,民行检察应与人大加强监督合力,共同推进社会主义和谐社会的构建。     

基于DS18b20的水温控制系统

本文介绍了DS18B20单总线数字温度传感器的工作原理和在水温控制系统的应用。     

关于扩大人大财政监督职责的几个问题

在我国,审议财政预算及其执行情况,是各级人民代表大会及其常务委员会监督政府机关的工作,规范政府行为的重要途径。由于历史和现实诸多因素的制约,目前我国人大财政预算监督质量还不高。对此我们认为:一、应该对人大的财政监督职能及其实施有更加明确、规范的规定。二、针对我国目前预算实施所出现的问题,考虑(1)建立重大项目的特别全程审查制度。(2)加强人大对部门预算的审查。三、明确“第二财政”的财政性,把他的使用纳入人大的审查和监督的范围。     

Do parties perceive their voter potentials correctly? Reconsidering the spatial logic of electoral competition

Political parties strive for maximizing their vote shares. One way to achieve this goal is to attract voters from competitors. A precondition for strategies aiming at attracting these voters is that parties perceive their voter potentials among their rivals' electorates correctly. Yet, hardly anything is known about such perceptions. To fill this gap, we develop analogue measures of a party's perceived and its actual voter potential for each competitor in a party system. Combining elite and mass surveys conducted in Germany, we show that perceived and actual voter potentials depend on spatial considerations but also that not all parties are able to correctly evaluate their potentials. These deviations can be traced back to differences in the perceived placement of political actors between elites and citizens. This supports the spatial logic of party competition but it also points to potential pitfalls for strategic behavior of political parties.     

Rejecting representation? Party systems and popular support for referendums in Europe

Under what conditions do citizens favor deciding political issues by popular vote? Models of support for popular vote processes usually consider the influence of individual attitudes such as political trust and interest in politics. But much less is known about the effect of institutional variables on support for popular vote processes. This article builds on research showing that disaffection with elected officials shapes support for referendums by considering the influence of the party system. First, an analysis of multilevel data from twenty-four European democracies indicates that individuals are more supportive of referendums in countries with fewer effective political parties. Second, a mediation analysis provides evidence that the number of parties influences referendum support through individual-level political trust and external efficacy. Where there are fewer viable parties, feelings that elected officials are unresponsive tend to increase popular support for referendums. These findings suggest a trade-off between available representation by political parties and support for direct influence over public policy.     

Voter perceptions of parties’ left–right positions: The role of party strategies

Left–right semantics help voters simplify the complex political reality as they reduce party views on a variety of issues to a single dimension. Less studied, however, is the question of how voters arrive at parties’ left–right positions and how parties can influence voter perceptions. In this article, I demonstrate that the party can shape the voter’s understanding of the content of its left–right ideology by using three strategies: avoidance, ambivalence, or ambiguity. Specifically, the party may avoid or de-emphasize, embrace a conflicting position, or becloud its position on the controversial issue; by so doing, it induces voters to place less weight on this issue when perceiving the party’s left–right position. The empirical analysis connects voter and party data from 21 European democracies in the period 1996–2014 and finds empirical support for the effectiveness of these strategies. In particular, the study finds robust empirical evidence that strategic avoidance, ambivalence, and ambiguity strongly moderate the association between the party’s perceived ideological brand and its underlying issue content.