IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v54y2010i2p338-353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Giving the People What They Want? The Distribution of Earmarks in the U.S. House of Representatives

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey Lazarus

Abstract

The common wisdom in journalistic accounts of earmarking is that Congress distributes earmarks on a purely political basis, without any consideration for the demand for federal spending. Academic accounts similarly argue that factors internal to Congress are preeminent in determining where earmarks go, even more than for other types of pork‐barrel spending. Using earmarks appearing in the fiscal year 2008 Appropriations bills, I search for both chamber‐based and demand‐side determinants of the distribution of earmarks. I find that both types of factors are significantly related to the number of earmarks that a House member receives. This result indicates that even while earmarking, members of Congress are at least minimally responsive to voter preferences and calls into question whether earmarks should be treated as an outlier within the universe of spending allocation mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey Lazarus, 2010. "Giving the People What They Want? The Distribution of Earmarks in the U.S. House of Representatives," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 338-353, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:54:y:2010:i:2:p:338-353
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00434.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00434.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00434.x?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. Rich, Michael J., 1989. "Distributive Politics and the Allocation of Federal Grants," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 193-213, March.
    2. Weingast, Barry R & Marshall, William J, 1988. "The Industrial Organization of Congress; or, Why Legislatures, Like Firms, Are Not Organized as Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(1), pages 132-163, February.
    3. John A. Hird, 1990. "Superfund expenditures and cleanup priorities: Distributive politics or the public interest?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 455-483.
    4. Alvarez, R Michael & Saving, Jason L, 1997. "Congressional Committees and the Political Economy of Federal Outlays," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 92(1-2), pages 55-73, July.
    5. Frances E. Lee, 2003. "Geographic Politics in the U.S. House of Representatives: Coalition Building and Distribution of Benefits," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 714-728, October.
    6. Hird, John A., 1991. "The Political Economy of Pork: Project Selection at The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(2), pages 429-456, June.
    7. Stein, Robert M., 1981. "The Allocation of Federal Aid Monies: The Synthesis of Demand-Side and Supply-Side Explanations," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(2), pages 334-343, June.
    8. de Figueiredo, John M & Silverman, Brian S, 2006. "Academic Earmarks and the Returns to Lobbying," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(2), pages 597-625, October.
    9. Gist, John R. & Hill, R. Carter, 1984. "Political and economic influences on the bureaucratic allocation of federal funds: The case of Urban Development Action Grants," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 158-172, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    2. Stratmann, Thomas, 2013. "The effects of earmarks on the likelihood of reelection," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 341-355.
    3. Asako Yasushi & Matsubayashi Tetsuya & Ueda Michiko, 2016. "Legislative Term Limits and Government Spending: Theory and Evidence from the United States," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(3), pages 1501-1538, September.
    4. Hyun‐A Kim & Dongwon Lee & Sangwon Park, 2020. "Budget Committee And Intergovernmental Transfer: Evidence From South Korea," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 58(4), pages 1894-1906, October.

    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. Larcinese, Valentino & Rizzo, Leonzio & Testa, Cecilia, 2005. "Allocating the US federal budget to the states: the impact of the President," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3611, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Yaniv Reingewertz & Thushyanthan Baskaran, 2020. "Distributive spending and presidential partisan politics," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 65-85, October.
    3. Jeremy L. Hall, 2010. "The Distribution of Federal Economic Development Grant Funds: A Consideration of Need and the Urban/Rural Divide," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 24(4), pages 311-324, November.
    4. Batzilis, Dimitris, 2020. "The political determinants of government spending allocation and growth," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 213-220.
    5. Brian Knight, 2002. "Endogenous Federal Grants and Crowd-out of State Government Spending: Theory and Evidence from the Federal Highway Aid Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 71-92, March.
    6. John M. de Figueiredo, 2011. "Committee Jurisdiction, Congressional Behavior and Policy Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 17171, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Deepak Hegde, 2009. "Political Influence behind the Veil of Peer Review: An Analysis of Public Biomedical Research Funding in the United States," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(4), pages 665-690, November.
    8. A. Abigail Payne, 2003. "The Effects of Congressional Appropriation Committee Membership on the Distribution of Federal Research Funding to Universities," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(2), pages 325-345, April.
    9. John de Figueiredo, 2013. "Committee jurisdiction, congressional behavior and policy outcomes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 119-137, January.
    10. Yusaku Horiuchi, 2007. "Political Institutions and Distributive Politics in Japan : Getting Along with the Opposition," Governance Working Papers 21899, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    11. José Bercoff & Osvaldo Meloni, 2009. "Federal budget allocation in an emergent democracy: evidence from Argentina," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 65-83, January.
    12. Royce Carroll & Henry A. Kim, 2010. "Party Government and the “Cohesive Power of Public Plunder”," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 34-44, January.
    13. Eric Helland, 1999. "The Waiver Pork Barrel: Committee Membership And The Approval Time Of Medicaid Waivers," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 17(3), pages 401-411, July.
    14. A. Abigail Payne & Aloysius Siow, 1998. "Estimating the Effects of Federal Research Funding on Universities using Alumni Representation on Congressional Appropriations Committees," Working Papers siow-99-02, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    15. Greenberg, Michael & Irving, Will & Zimmerman, Rae, 2009. "Allocating U.S. Department of Homeland Security funds to States with explicit equity, population and energy facility security criteria," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 229-239, December.
    16. Shirley Svorny & Leah Marcal, 2002. "The Allocation Of Federal Funds To Promote Bureaucratic Objectives: An Empirical Test," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(3), pages 209-220, July.
    17. Brian Knight, 2000. "The flypaper effect unstuck: evidence on endogenous grants from the Federal Highway Aid Program," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2000-49, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    18. Riemer P. Faber & Pierre Koning, 2017. "Why not fully spend a conditional block grant?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(1), pages 60-95, February.
    19. Joseph McGarrity, 2005. "Macroeconomic conditions and committee re-election rates," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 453-480, September.
    20. Dahm, Matthias & Glazer, Amihai, 2015. "A carrot and stick approach to agenda-setting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 465-480.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:amposc:v:54:y:2010:i:2:p:338-353. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.