就臺灣過去的選舉經驗來看，能夠在選舉中進行有組織配票的政黨，僅有國民黨 而已，也因此讓國民黨藉由配票而降低每一席次的取得成本，享有「超額代表」的利益；而 在野黨由於欠缺同樣的組織，只能寄望於選民的「自動配票」，無法由政黨主導。 84 年立 委選舉，新黨為避免遭受「低度代表」的損失，發展出迥異於國民黨「責任區」的新式配票 法：平均配票。而從選舉結果來看，新黨實施平均配票的選區，幾乎大獲全勝，只有臺北縣 落選兩席而已，但平均配票何以成功的原因？以及是否只要提名人當選就是平均配票的成功 ？這些問題都有待進一步的討論。 在本文中，筆者首先就平均配票的決策過程進行討論，繼而探討平均配票的效果，以及影響 平均配票效果的變數。最後則針對未來有意使用平均配票策略的政黨提供策略上的建議。 Prior to the 1995 Legislative elections, the only party which could equalize the vote was the KMT. Because KMT could reduce the cost of winning a seat, it was always overrepresented. Although the opposition parties did not have strong grass-root organizations, they still looked for other ways to equalize the vote to prevent underrepresentation. In the 1995 elections, the New Party (NP) used a new method (forced vote distribution) to equalize their vote in Taipei City, Taipei County and Taoyuan County. This method enabled 12 of their 14 candidates to win. Why was the NP able to use forced vote distribution in the election? Did all nominees in a particular district winning seats mean the forced vote distribution had been effective? In this paper, I discuss the policy making procedure and the factors that influence the effect of the forced vote distribution. Finally, I give some advice to the parties that will use this campaign strategy in the future.