美国政府拨款法案727条款的国内合法性研究

发布时间：2018-03-27 09:37

本文选题：政府拨款法案　切入点：727条款　出处：《中国政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 随着经济危机的逐步加剧和蔓延,各国纷纷采取各种积极措施来制定本国的经济发展政策,以求本国经济环境快速地企稳向好。各国制定本国的经济政策来控制宏观经济环境,本无可厚非。然而在各种经济政策中,也不乏有损WTO自由贸易原则的贸易保护主义行为,严重侵害了多哈回合谈判所达成的共识,同时也对相关国家的产业造成莫大的损害。我国由于出口额巨大,更是成为贸易保护主义纷纷针对的矛头。美国2009年政府拨款法案中第727条款,单独对中国的禽类产品进口施加限制。这一不公正举动遭到我国政府的严厉谴责,并诉诸WTO争端解决机构以求公正裁决。本文旨在通过对美国国内法律制度的研究,来探讨727条款在美国法律的实体和程序中是否存在合法性欠缺的问题,进而探求在美国国内法合法性角度解决案件争议的新思路。文章共分四章。第一章简单介绍争端产生的背景及进程,从而引出争议的焦点—727条款的合法性问题。进而,对727条款的条文来源进行考察,对条文本身的意义进行分析阐述,对制定过程中的立法考量加以研究,以求进一步了解该条款产生的原因以及立法意图。第二章从2008年政府拨款法案的733条款(727条款的前身)的立法背景及过程进行分析。文章展示了中美之间禽类产品进口问题的始末。并重点分析了美国制定733条款时可能存在的利益考量。同时文章表明733条款之所以在下一个财年得以延续,并非因为其表面的原因,即禽流感控制以及食品安全的问题,而是上升到了限制中国禽类产品进口的意图。第三章进入论文的主体部分论述。分为三节。第一节介绍政府拨款法案产生的具体流程。第二节从美国外贸权的分配问题探究该过程中是否可能存在合法性欠缺的问题。第三节旨在从美国预算法案议事过程分析中寻找727条款可能存在的合法性欠缺的问题。每一节又分为两部分,第一部分简单概述美国法律的相关规定以及实践中的具体做法,第二部分针对该条款进行具体分析。第四章第一节中提及在美国2010年农业拨款法案草案中对727条款加以修正的743条款,分析该条文的具体规定以及利益体现。第二节则简单分析第三章中分析得出的结论——727条款不具备国内合法性的理由,能否适用于743条款。第三节,简单对中美禽类产品贸易的未来加以预测评析。
[Abstract]:With the gradual aggravation and spread of the economic crisis, many countries have taken various positive measures to formulate their own economic development policies in order to stabilize and improve their economic environment quickly. All countries have formulated their own economic policies to control the macroeconomic environment. However, among the various economic policies, there are many protectionist acts that undermine the principle of free trade of the WTO, seriously undermining the consensus reached in the Doha Round of negotiations. At the same time, it has also caused great damage to the industries of the countries concerned. Because of its huge exports, China has become the target of trade protectionism one after another. Article 727 of the 2009 US Government Appropriations Act, The unfair act of imposing restrictions on the import of poultry products from China alone has been severely condemned by our government and appealed to the WTO dispute settlement body for a fair ruling. This article aims to study the domestic legal system of the United States. This paper discusses whether there is a lack of legality in the entity and procedure of American law, and then explores a new way to resolve the dispute in the angle of legality of American domestic law. The article is divided into four chapters. The first chapter briefly introduces the background and process of the dispute, which leads to the issue of the legality of clause -727. Then, the article's source is investigated, and the significance of the article itself is analyzed and expounded. The legislative considerations in the formulation process are studied in order to further understand the causes and legislative intent of the clause. The second chapter analyzes the legislative background and process of the 733 section 727 of the 2008 government appropriation act. The article shows the beginning and end of the issue of poultry product import between china and the United states. It also focuses on the analysis of the 733 article made by the United states. At the same time, the article indicated that the 733 clause was extended in the next fiscal year. Not because of the apparent problems of bird flu control and food safety, but because of the intention to restrict imports of Chinese poultry products. The third chapter is the main part of the thesis. It is divided into three sections. The first section introduces the specific process of the government appropriation bill. The second section probes into the possibility of the lack of legitimacy in the process from the issue of the distribution of foreign trade power in the u. S. A. Section III aims to find out from the analysis of the proceedings of the United States Budget Act that there may be a lack of legitimacy in section 727. Each section is divided into two parts. The first part is a brief overview of the relevant provisions of American law and the practice of specific practices, the second part of the specific analysis of the article. Chapter IV, section I, refers to section 743, which is amended in the United States draft Agricultural Appropriations Act of 2010, The second section briefly analyzes the conclusion drawn from the analysis in Chapter 3 whether Article 727 is applicable to Article 743 on the grounds that it does not have domestic legality. Simply predict the future of the trade in poultry products between China and the United States.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D971.2

【参考文献】