资料图:美国众议院共和党领袖麦卡锡。中新社记者 沙晗汀摄
由于两党对立加剧、党派内斗、利益分配不均等因素,众议长选举陷入一场拉锯战。在此次众议长竞选中,美国民主党议员继续抱团,多轮投票中,一票不投麦卡锡,共和党右翼“强硬派”领头的约20人小团体也拒绝投票麦卡锡。
麦卡锡的当选之路一波三折,除了本人的“政治投机派”角色在国会不受欢迎外,与共和党内部政治分歧关系密切。
一方面,共和党党内反对者认为,麦卡锡对民主党态度过于软弱,无力对抗民主党控制的参议院和拜登政府,另一方面,因为共和党的多数优势微弱,党内一些影响力较小的派系的政治力量则被放大,有利于他们巩固自己的选票。
此外,党内反对者也认为,自己的选票没有换取更多利益,希望以此作为筹码换取麦卡锡更大的让步,比如让他们获得众议院重要委员会中的职务。
作为仅次于美国总统、副总统的政坛三号人物,众议院议长通常由众议院多数党领袖担任,选举几乎没有悬念。然而,麦卡锡此次为当选,不得不做出多个关键让步,其中可能包括恢复一项罢黜议长动议机制,使得众议长的权力被削弱,难以掌控众议院。
美国有线电视新闻网CNN称,麦卡锡在这场不合时宜的政治勒索中作出让步,这种绥靖政策只会让极端主义势力更加强大。
这场引发全世界围观的尴尬选举暴露出美国政治存在严重的对立和分化。在权力博弈思维的裹挟下,党派利益凌驾于国家和人民利益之上,美国两党相互拆台,陷入“为反对而反对”的无脑对垒。而即便是一党内,也会因为利益分配问题产生不同的小派系,相互对抗,选票变成了谋利益的工具。
从国会山骚乱到打破记历史记录的15轮众议长选举,“对抗式民主”让美国政治陷入瓶颈,长期对抗势必会让政客们丧失客观公正的判断能力,其政治阶层是否有能力治理国家也会引发质疑。
两党之争和党派内斗进一步放大了美国政治体制弊病,美国所谓的“民主”形象,让全世界大跌眼镜。鼓吹以选民利益为先的美式选举,变成了政客们利益置换的游戏,进一步彰显出美国“民主政治”日渐失能,不断极化的党争已使美国政治制度陷入死循环。
House speaker election reveals deep-rooted problems in U.S. democracy
(ECNS) -- The Republican leader Kevin McCarthy was elected as the 55th speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives after 15 ballots. As the most grueling House speaker election in the past 164 years, the election has highlighted the defects of the country’s "confrontational democracy".
The election once reached a stalemate due to intense partisan strife, inner-party struggle among the Republicans, uneven distribution of interests, and more. Democratic Party members forged a close alliance, refusing to vote for McCarthy, while about 20 Republicans also declined to cast ballots for the GOP leader.
Except for his unpopular role as a "political speculator" in Congress, McCarthy’s hard-won election can be attributed to turmoil within the Republican Party.
On the one hand, opponents in the Republican Party believe that the GOP leader's attitude toward the Democrats is too weak to confront the Senate controlled by Democrats and the Biden administration.
On the other hand, the political power of some less influential factions in the Republican Party has been amplified due to the Party’s weak majority advantage in the House of Representatives, which is conducive to consolidating their ticket warehouses.
Meanwhile, these opponents believe that their votes failed to win them more benefits, hoping to use this as a bargaining chip for McCarthy's further concessions, such as getting them positions in important House Committees.
As the third political figure after the President and Vice President of the U.S., the speaker, by tradition, is the head of the majority party in the House of Representatives.
But McCarthy has made many concessions in order to bring the ultra conservatives along, involving what’s known as the “motion to vacate,” a mechanism by which members can force a vote to depose the speaker. The reported concessions will empower individual members at the expense of McCarthy’s sway as speaker.
CNN thought the concessions he made during this unseemly political shakedown would only make the extremist faction more powerful.
This embarrassing election, which has drawn global attention, exposed the serious opposition and polarization in American politics. Both Democrats and Republicans put their interests before that of the country and its people, attacking and opposing each other irrationally.
Besides, different factions arise within a single party and confront each other because of the distribution of interests. Votes have become a tool to win more benefits.
From Capitol riots to the House Speaker election with record-breaking ballots, "confrontational democracy" has become a bottleneck of American politics. Long-term confrontation will surely impede politicians to think objectively and fairly while their capacity of governing the country will also raise doubts among the public.
Both parties’ struggle and infighting among the Republicans have further amplified the defects of the American political system, with its "democratic" image shocking the world.
The U.S.-style election, which advocates putting voters' interests first, has become a game of interest exchange among politicians. In addition, it further demonstrates the malfunction of American "democratic politics" and the constantly polarized party struggle that has trapped the American political system into an infinite cycle.
双集中供地模式迎变******
试点两年,双集中的供地方式迎来优化。2月2日,一份落款为自然资源部办公厅发布的《关于进一步规范住宅用地供应信息公开工作的通知》(以下简称《通知》),要求各市、县自然资源部门根据年度供地计划,分批次公开未来一定时间段内拟出让地块的详细清单。每次公开详细清单对应的拟出让时间段原则上不少于3个月,同时,详细清单内的地块,在公开的拟出让时间段内可以一次或多次发布出让公告,这意味着试点两年的双集中供地模式迎来转变。
业内分析指出,转变不代表要取消集中供地,更为灵活的供地方式和节奏,将更符合“销售市场活跃-投资拿地活跃”的逻辑。
根据形势“调整和优化”
《通知》的核心要点是“推进供应信息公开”。《通知》明确,建立拟出让地块清单公布制度,每次公开详细清单对应的拟出让时间段原则上不少于3个月,给市场主体充足的时间预期限制。同时,详细清单内的地块,在公开的拟出让时间段内可以一次或多次发布出让公告,这意味着试点两年的双集中供地模式迎来转变。
上海易居房地产研究院研究总监严跃进表示,建立拟出让地块清单公布制度实际上是对过去集中供地模式的修正。2022年集中供地工作推进中,过于密集的供地,导致房企拿地的准备工作遇到了很多困难,最终导致对于地块的情况掌握不到位,也影响了投资拿地的策略。政策明确了3个月的缓冲期,实际上是希望地块信息为房企和市场所消化,本质上也是希望土地供应工作和市场需求做紧密的对接。
在严跃进看来,政策内容不代表要取消集中供地,而是要对集中供地进一步优化,充分体现了供地思路兼顾短期矛盾和中长期制度安排需要。虽然今年1月份各地投资拿地依然比较疲软,但随着“销售市场活跃-投资拿地活跃”的逻辑线更加清晰,后续各类企业依然会有积极拿地的动作。
“并非‘取消’,而是根据形势‘调整和优化’。”广东省规划院住房政策研究中心首席研究员李宇嘉分析称,集中供地是长效机制,不能因市场低迷就退出。集中供地的本源,一方面是疏通供需双方的信息,引导各方预期,避免抢地导致地价推动房价,导致资金大规模涌入楼市;另一方面是通过对土地合理定价,纠偏地方无序的土地财政行为,并通过强化信心披露和供地规则,倒逼熟地出让,降低开发商拿地无序的成本。
部分城市此前已放宽
2021年2月,自然资源部要求22个试点城市实施住宅用地“两集中”,即集中发布出让公告、集中组织出让活动,且2021年发布住宅用地公告不能超过3次。但事实上,此前已有部分城市打破了集中供地次数的限制,改为一年四次或多次的集中供地,更有城市暂停了集中供地模式。
据了解,北京、杭州、南京、苏州、无锡等城市于2022年纷纷推出五批次集中供地,武汉在2022年更是上架了六批次集中供地。
2022年10月,江西住建厅发文,将持续完善房地产政策,积极争取国家有关部委支持,力争将南昌从“集中供地”城市名单中调出。此外,22个试点城市中的长沙也于去年官宣土地推介方式将进行调整,今后不再按年度批次推介土地,更改为年度常态化持续更新推介。2023年开年,天津首次单独挂出1宗涉宅用地。
中指研究院土地市场研究负责人张凯在“中指市场形势及企业研究成果分享会”上介绍,回顾2022年22城集中供地来看,计划完成率不足六成。对于2023年土地市场走势,业内人士预计并不乐观。其中,市场热度仍将持续分化,安全应成为今年房企选择城市的重要标准。在土地规则上,各地采取多次分散供地,优化供地条件,降低参拍门槛。
李宇嘉指出,集中供地模式是在疫情后开始推的,主要是应对当时高地价及新一轮楼市上涨。同时,从那时开始,也开启了一揽子长效机制建设。当对房企定向去杠杆、要求自有资金拿地,全面打掉“前融”时,通过集中供地(一天内完成十几宗地块出让)控制源头上抢地、诞生高地价的必要性,已下降了很多。但后续商品房市场下行,回款走低,开发商资金链紧张,此时继续沿用集中供地,在很多城市甚至导致大面积流拍,恶化市场预期的同时,此前出让的高价地也无法开发了,甚至计提坏账准备。
此次《通知》也明确,各地要将住宅用地近三年平均完成交易量以及对应的住宅建筑面积,作为测算下一年度供地计划总量的参考。要“因城施策”安排计划总量,凡商品住房去化周期长、土地流拍率高、市场需求明显不足的城市,应当控制商品住房用地供应规模,其中已供应未竣工住宅用地面积超过近三年平均完成交易量5倍的城市,应当从严压缩计划规模直至暂停供地。
北京商报记者 王寅浩
(文图:赵筱尘 巫邓炎)