论文部分内容阅读
从总体上看,我国农村最低生活保障的地方性立法和地方法制资源的利用程度并不高,仅为29.6%,且集中于2004—2006三年内。这种格局反映出各地制度建设的成熟度和规范性存在差异,亦反映出农民低保权制度化的多样性和复杂性。从制度比较上看,地方立法样本的城乡一体化率占14.8%,农村低保对象的定量认定占70.8%,同时各地辅以内涵不同的定性条件和附加条件;在低保标准的确定上,各地普遍存在双挂钩法、人均收入法、人均消费支出法、直接规定法、授权法和CPI法等不同做法;在资金来源上,地方立法样本采用了多种模式。分析表明,应加大中央立法的进程,并在对象界定、标准确定、资金运行等关键环节引导地方立法文件的规范化。
Generally speaking, the utilization of the local legislation and the resources of the local legal system of guaranteeing the minimum living standard in rural areas in our country is not high, only 29.6% and concentrated in the three years of 2004-2006. This pattern reflects the differences in the maturity and normativeness of the institutional construction in all localities as well as the diversity and complexity of the institutionalization of peasants’ subsistence allowances. In terms of system comparison, the sample of local legislation accounts for 14.8% of urban-rural integration and 70.8% of rural residents with minimum living allowance. At the same time, the qualifications and additional conditions with different connotation are complemented with each other. In determining the minimum living standard, There are widespread double hooks, per capita income laws, per capita spending laws, direct regulation laws, empowerment laws and CPI laws. Various sources are used in the sample of local legislation. The analysis shows that the process of the Central Legislation should be stepped up and the standardization of local legislative documents should be guided in key links such as the definition of the object, the determination of the standard and the operation of the capital.