분점정부와 입법효율성: 서울시와 경기도를 사례로

Abstract

본 연구는 무상급식을 둘러싼 정치적 갈등구조가 입법과정 전반에 투영되어 입법효율성에도 일정한 영향을 미쳤을 것이라는 점을 전제로 첫째, 서울시･경기도의 단점정부와 분점정부 시기의 실증자료를 바탕으로 입법효율성을 상호 비교 분석한다. 둘째, 단점정부와 분점정부 구조 하에서 나타난 입법효율성의 차이는 존재하는지, 만약 차이가 있다면 그 이유는 무엇인지를 밝히는데 목적이 있다. 분석결과 분점정부 시기인 민선5기 서울시가 모든 입법효율성 측정지표에서 경기도에 비해 높거나 길게 나타나 두 지역의 입법효율성에는 차이가 있었다. 이를 단점정부 시기인 민선4기와 비교해 보면 전반적으로 서울시는 분점정부 시기가 단점정부에 비해 입법효율성 측정지표가 높거나 길게 나타나 분점정부의 입법효율성이 낮게 나타난 반면, 경기도는 분점정부와 단점정부 시기에 재의요구율을 제외한 입법효율성 측정지표가 큰 차이가 없어 단점정부와 분점정부의 입법효율성에는 별다른 차이가 없는 것으로 분석되었다. 이러한 두 지역 간 입법효율성의 차이는 분점정부 운영방식의 차이 때문인 것으로 분석되었으며, 이를 통해 반드시 분점정부가 단점정부에 비해 일률적으로 입법효율성이 떨어진다기 보다는 분점정부 운영방식에 따라 차이가 날 수 있음을 확인할 수 있었다. This study conducts a comparative analysis of the efficiency of legislation based on empirical materials in the periods of unified government and divided government of Seoul metropolitan city and Gyeonggi province, on the assumption that the structure of political conflicts surrounding free school meals was reflected in the overall legislative process and had a certain impact on the efficiency of legislation, and by analyzing whether the difference in the efficiency of legislation under the structure of divided government was caused by the method of its operation. The analysis shows that in the period of divided government, the 5th local government of Seoul elected by popular vote had higher or longer values in all indicators measuring the efficiency of legislation than those of Gyeonggi, so there was a difference in the efficiency of legislation between the two areas. When this was compared to the period of the 4th local government elected by popular vote, which was a period of unified government, overall Seoul had higher or longer values in the indicators measuring the efficiency of legislation in the period of divided government than in the period of unified government, so the efficiency of the legislation of divided government was lower; while in Gyeonggi, there was no big difference in the indicators measuring the efficiency of legislation except for the rate of request for reconsideration, between the periods of divided government and unified government. Thus, it was determined that there was no particular difference in the efficiency of legislation between unified government and divided government. It was determined from analysis that this difference in the efficiency of legislation between the two areas was caused by the method of operation of divided government, and through this, it was found that the efficiency of the legislation of divided government was not necessarily lower than that of unified government, but rather, there might be a difference according to the method of the operation of divided government.