IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v50y2022i2p135-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Presidential Particularism on Economic Well-Being: A County-Level Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jamie Bologna Pavlik
  • Maria Tackett

Abstract

Does it pay to be a locale of political importance? Political business cycle theory predicts that the executive has an incentive to manipulate policy to increase the chances of their party remaining in office. In particular, core counties (those that vote for the current administration) have been shown to enjoy disproportionately higher federal spending. In this paper, we explore how this funding affects the well-being of an area by estimating the effect of presidential particularism on governmental transfers and (productive) income per-capita using county-level data from 1993 to 2012. We find that transfer payments tend to be higher and income lower in counties that vote for the current administration. These findings are robust across a wide number of specifications including fixed effects, first differences, a first differenced model with county-specific time trends, and a matching analysis. Moreover, results hold when examining the subset of counties that only voted for a single party throughout the entire sample where the treatment (whether the county voted for the current administration) is largely exogenous to the county in question.

Suggested Citation

  • Jamie Bologna Pavlik & Maria Tackett, 2022. "The Effect of Presidential Particularism on Economic Well-Being: A County-Level Analysis," Public Finance Review, , vol. 50(2), pages 135-168, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:50:y:2022:i:2:p:135-168
    DOI: 10.1177/10911421221093664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10911421221093664
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10911421221093664?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clément de Chaisemartin & Xavier D'Haultfœuille, 2020. "Two-Way Fixed Effects Estimators with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(9), pages 2964-2996, September.
    2. Kauder, Björn & Potrafke, Niklas & Reischmann, Markus, 2016. "Do politicians reward core supporters? Evidence from a discretionary grant program," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 39-56.
    3. Marcelin Joanis, 2018. "The Politics of Checkbook Federalism," Public Finance Review, , vol. 46(4), pages 665-691, July.
    4. Kauder, Björn & Potrafke, Niklas & Reischmann, Markus, 2016. "Do politicians reward core supporters? Evidence from a discretionary grant program," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 39-56.
    5. Andrew Young & Russell Sobel, 2013. "Recovery and Reinvestment Act spending at the state level: Keynesian stimulus or distributive politics?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 449-468, June.
    6. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    7. Carlos Cinelli & Chad Hazlett, 2020. "Making sense of sensitivity: extending omitted variable bias," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 82(1), pages 39-67, February.
    8. Weingast, Barry R & Moran, Mark J, 1983. "Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(5), pages 765-800, October.
    9. Cordis, Adriana S. & Warren, Patrick L., 2014. "Sunshine as disinfectant: The effect of state Freedom of Information Act laws on public corruption," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 18-36.
    10. Weihua An & Christopher Winship, 2017. "Causal Inference in Panel Data With Application to Estimating Race-of-Interviewer Effects in the General Social Survey," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(1), pages 68-102, January.
    11. Barry Weingast, 1984. "The congressional-bureaucratic system: a principal agent perspective (with applications to the SEC)," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 147-191, January.
    12. McCarty, Nolan M., 2000. "Presidential Pork: Executive Veto Power and Distributive Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(1), pages 117-129, March.
    13. Kauder, Björn & Björn, Kauder & Niklas, Potrafke & Markus, Reischmann, 2016. "Do politicians gratify core supporters? Evidence from a discretionary grant program," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145509, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Higgins, Matthew J. & Levy, Daniel & Young, Andrew T., 2006. "Growth and Convergence across the United States: Evidence from County-Level Data," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 88(4), pages 671-681.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luisa Schneider & Daniela Wech & Matthias Wrede, 2022. "Political alignment and project funding," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 29(6), pages 1561-1589, December.
    2. Levoshko, Tamila, 2017. ""Pork-Barrel"-Politik und das regionale Wirtschaftswachstum. Empirische Evidenz für die Ukraine und Polen," Working Papers 0642, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    3. Kayode Taiwo, 2022. "Intergovernmental Transfers and Own Revenues of Subnational Governments in Nigeria," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 240(1), pages 31-59, March.
    4. Kantorowicz, Jarosław & Köppl–Turyna, Monika, 2019. "Disentangling the fiscal effects of local constitutions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 63-87.
    5. Justin T. Callais & Jamie Bologna Pavlik, 2023. "Does economic freedom lighten the blow? Evidence from the great recession in the United States," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 357-398, September.
    6. Potrafke, Niklas & Roesel, Felix, 2020. "The urban–rural gap in healthcare infrastructure: does government ideology matter?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 54(3), pages 340-351.
    7. Kayode Taiwo & Linda G. Veiga, 2020. "Is there an “invisible hand” in the formula-based intergovernmental transfers in Nigeria?," NIPE Working Papers 02/2020, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    8. Boland, Matthew & Godsell, David, 2021. "Bureaucratic discretion and contracting outcomes," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Gregor, András, 2020. "Intergovernmental transfers and political competition measured by pivotal probability - Evidence from Hungary," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    10. Yannick Bury & Lars P. Feld & Ekkehard A. Köhler, 2020. "Do Party Ties Increase Transfer Receipts in Cooperative Federalism? - Evidence from Germany," CESifo Working Paper Series 8580, CESifo.
    11. Garance Genicot & Laurent Bouton & Micael Castanheira, 2021. "Electoral Systems and Inequalities in Government Interventions [“Distributive Politics and Electoral Incentives: Evidence from Seven US State Legislatures.”]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(6), pages 3154-3206.
    12. Ilya A. Vaskin, 2020. "Buying Loyalty Of Voters Or Local Elites? Political Alignment And Transfers To Provinces In Tutelary Regimes: The Case Of Iran," HSE Working papers WP BRP 73/PS/2020, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    13. Stephan Schneider & Sven Kunze, 2021. "Disastrous Discretion: Ambiguous Decision Situations Foster Political Favoritism," KOF Working papers 21-491, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    14. Brice Fabre & Marc Sangnier, 2022. "Where do politicians send pork? Evidence from central government transfers to French municipalities," DeFiPP Working Papers 2202, University of Namur, Development Finance and Public Policies.
    15. Mogge, Lukas & McDonald, Morag & Knoth, Christian & Teickner, Henning & Purevtseren, Myagmartseren & Pebesma, Edzer & Kraehnert, Kati, 2023. "Allocation of humanitarian aid after a weather disaster," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    16. Gonschorek, Gerrit J. & Schulze, Günther G. & Sjahrir, Bambang Suharnoko, 2018. "To the ones in need or the ones you need? The political economy of central discretionary grants − empirical evidence from Indonesia," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 240-260.
    17. Alberto Batinti, 2016. "NIH biomedical funding: evidence of executive dominance in swing-voter states during presidential elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 239-263, September.
    18. Fabio Fiorillo & Elvina Merkaj, 2021. "A comprehensive approach to intergovernmental grants’ tactical allocation. Theory and estimation guidelines," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(4), pages 995-1013, August.
    19. Geert Jennes, 2021. "Interregional fiscal transfers resulting from central government debt: New insights and consequences for political economy," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 196-223, May.
    20. Matuszak Piotr & Totleben Bartosz & Piątek Dawid, 2022. "Political alignment and the allocation of the COVID-19 response funds—evidence from municipalities in Poland," Economics and Business Review, Sciendo, vol. 8(1), pages 50-71, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:50:y:2022:i:2:p:135-168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.