This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Do Small States Get More Federal Monies? Myth and Reality about the US Senate Malapportionment

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Valentino Larcinese (London School of Economics and STICERD)
Leonzio Rizzo (University of Ferrara and Catholic University, Milan)
Cecilia Testa () (Department of Economics, Royal Holloway, University of London)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

We analyze the relationship between senate malapportionment and the allocation of the US federal budget to the states during the period 1978-2002. A substantial literature originating from the influential paper by Atlas et al (1995, using a within estimation methodology finds that small and overrepresented states get significantly larger shares of federal funds. Revisiting the econometric specification used by the current empirical research, we show that the number of senators percapita is inappropriate to capture malapportionement in regressions using broad federal programs, and that the results obtained with this indicator are extremely non-robust to reasonable specification changes. In particular, senators percapita have a significant impact on federal spending only in regressions containing state fixed effects. Furthermore, the coefficients estimated using the within methodology are statistically different across states and, therefore, cannot be used to assess spending differentials between states. The magnitude and significance of those coefficients suggest a within state-specific inverse relationship between broad spending categories and population which is not systematically related to the size of the states and seems more compatible with incrementalist theories of budget allocation.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.rhul.ac.uk/economics/Research/WorkingPapers/pdf/dpe0701.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London in its series Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics with number 07/01.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: May 2007
Date of revision: May 2007
Handle: RePEc:hol:holodi:0701

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK.
Phone: +44 1784-414228
Fax: +44 1784-439534
Web page: http://www.rhul.ac.uk/economics/

Order Information:
Postal: Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK.
Email:

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Claire Blackman).

Related research
Keywords: federal budget; malapportionment; small state advantage; overrepresentation;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H60 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt - - - General
H61 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt - - - Budget; Budget Systems
H77 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Brian Knight, 2004. "Legislative Representation, Bargaining Power, and the Distribution of Federal Funds: Evidence from the U.S. Senate," NBER Working Papers 10385, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Valentino Larcinese & Leonzio Rizzo & Cecilia Testa, 2005. "Allocating the US Federal Budget to the States: the Impact of the President," STICERD - Political Economy and Public Policy Paper Series 03, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE. [Downloadable!]
  3. Brian Knight, 2005. "Estimating the Value of Proposal Power," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1639-1652, December. [Downloadable!]
  4. Wright, Gavin, 1974. "The Political Economy of New Deal Spending: An Econometric Analysis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(1), pages 30-38, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Gary Hoover & Paul Pecorino, 2005. "The Political Determinants of Federal Expenditure at the State Level," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 95-113, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There are over 21000 authors registered on RePEc Author Service.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-5.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.