中新网评：美国众议长选举“连续剧”暴露美式民主痼疾******
中新网北京1月9日电(蒋鲤)在15轮投票表决后，美国众议院议长选举这场“连续剧”终于落下帷幕，众议院共和党领袖凯文·麦卡锡最终成功当选第55任美国众议院议长。这是美国国会过去164年来耗时最久的一次议长选举记录，将美国“对抗式民主”的弊端暴露无遗。
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.
用人单位自订“土规定”解聘员工为何违法******
近日，北京二中院披露了一起劳动纠纷案，用人单位以员工张某绩效考核不合格为由，与其解除劳动合同。法院判决公司属于违法解除，双方应继续履行劳动合同。(澎湃新闻1月31日)
根据现行法律法规，用人单位解雇员工，必须符合特定条件。劳动合同法规定，只有劳动者“在试用期间被证明不符合录用条件”“严重违反用人单位的规章制度”“严重失职，营私舞弊，给用人单位造成重大损害”等六种情形下，用人单位才可以单方解除劳动合同。此外，在劳动者“不能胜任工作，经过培训或者调整工作岗位，仍不能胜任工作”等三种情形下，用人单位虽然也能解雇员工，但必须“提前三十日以书面形式通知劳动者本人或者额外支付劳动者一个月工资”。
严格的法律条款，保护了劳动者的基本权益。但也有一些用人单位试图用“小动作”绕过法律规定。其中，自定一份内部规章制度，将绩效考核结果与员工去留实行挂钩，是很常见的做法。这些单位一旦遇到员工考核结果不达标的情况，就可能以“严重违反用人单位的规章制度”“不能胜任工作”为由，将员工“炒鱿鱼”。
北京二中院披露的这起纠纷也是如此。涉案用人单位早早制订了自己的绩效管理办法，规定企业有权对考核结果为待改进的员工予以解聘处理，无须支付任何补偿或赔偿。乍看上去，解聘当事员工，似乎是企业依规行事。但在法院看来，企业自订的“土规定”并不能改变这种行为的违法属性。
根据劳动合同法，用人单位在制定、修改或者决定直接涉及劳动者切身利益的规章制度或者重大事项时，应当经职工代表大会或者全体职工讨论，提出方案和意见，与工会或者职工代表平等协商确定，而不能自行其是，不把员工利益放在眼里。劳动立法之所以如此设计，正是为了避免用人单位自定“霸王条款”，侵犯劳动者权益。
一个用人单位，对员工最严厉的处罚，莫过于解聘开除。绩效考核反映的是员工工作实绩，并不能与劳动者违反用人单位规章制度混为一谈。一个绩效考核不合格的员工，就算“不胜任工作”，法律也规定了“挽救措施”，要求先“进行培训或者调整其工作岗位”，这也体现了法律以人为本的温度。
在这起纠纷中，员工张某既没有严重违反用人单位的规章制度，也没有犯多大的过错，给用人单位造成多重的损失，入职后若干年的表现，也都在“合格线”以上。数次考核结果为“待改进”，直接就“一棒子打死”，砸掉养家糊口的饭碗，于情于理于法，都说不过去。
基于现实生活的丰富性、立法的抽象性，任何法律条款都不可能穷尽一切现象，劳动立法也是如此。但保护劳动者合法权益，从来不是一句空话。在这起劳动纠纷案件中，法院通过掷地有声的司法判决，明确员工考核不合格不是解除劳动合同的充分理由，为用人单位划定了一条清晰的法治红线，张扬了从严保护劳动者权益的立法精神。(中国青年报 刘婷婷)
