IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ieb/wpaper/doc2010-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Representation and regional redistribution in federations

Author

Listed:
  • Tiberiu Dragu

    (University of Illinois)

  • Jonathan Rodden

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

This paper examines the role of institutions of territorial representation in shaping long-term patterns of inter-regional redistribution within federations. A simple legislative bargaining model with endogenous taxation suggests that over-represented states should be favored in the distribution of inter-governmental grants regardless of their income level. We demonstrate that a striking relationship between legislative representation and grants holds up in a diverse group of federations from around the world. The relationship appears not to be an artifact of economic development, population size, population density, or the historical conditions under which the federal bargain was struck. Furthermore, we suggest that the attractiveness of poor states as coalition partners implies that intergovernmental transfer systems will often tend toward progressivity under equal apportionment, but the systematic over-representation of wealthy (or poor) states can undermine (or bolster) this logic.

Suggested Citation

  • Tiberiu Dragu & Jonathan Rodden, 2010. "Representation and regional redistribution in federations," Working Papers 2010/16, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    • Handle: RePEc:ieb:wpaper:doc2010-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ieb.ub.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/2010-IEB-WorkingPaper-16.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Brian Knight, 2008. "Legislative Representation, Bargaining Power and the Distribution of Federal Funds: Evidence from the US Congress," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1785-1803, October.
    3. Ansolabehere, Stephen & Snyder, James M. & Ting, Michael M., 2003. "Bargaining in Bicameral Legislatures: When and Why Does Malapportionment Matter?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(3), pages 471-481, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Larcinese, Valentino & Rizzo, Leonzio & Testa, Cecilia, 2007. "Do Small States Get More Federal Monies? Myth and Reality about the US Senate Malapportionment," MPRA Paper 5339, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Tanzi,Vito & Schuknecht,Ludger, 2000. "Public Spending in the 20th Century," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521662918.
    7. Samuels, David & Snyder, Richard, 2001. "The Value of a Vote: Malapportionment in Comparative Perspective," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 651-671, October.
    8. Anderson, Gary M & Tollison, Robert D, 1991. "Congressional Influence and Patterns of New Deal Spending, 1933-1939," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(1), pages 161-175, April.
    9. Ansolabehere, Stephen & Gerber, Alan & Snyder, Jim, 2002. "Equal Votes, Equal Money: Court-Ordered Redistricting and Public Expenditures in the American States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(4), pages 767-777, December.
    10. Yusaku Horiuchi & Jun Saito, 2003. "Reapportionment and Redistribution: Consequences of Electoral Reform in Japan," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 669-682, October.
    11. Lee, Frances E., 2000. "Senate Representation and Coalition Building in Distributive Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(1), pages 59-72, March.
    12. Keele, Luke & Kelly, Nathan J., 2006. "Dynamic Models for Dynamic Theories: The Ins and Outs of Lagged Dependent Variables," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 186-205, April.
    13. Thiess Büttner & Fédéric Holm-Hadulla, 2008. "Cities in Fiscal Equalization," CESifo Working Paper Series 2447, CESifo.
    14. Atlas, Cary M, et al, 1995. "Slicing the Federal Government Net Spending Pie: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 624-629, June.
    15. Chen, Jowei & Malhotra, Neil, 2007. "The Law of k/n: The Effect of Chamber Size on Government Spending in Bicameral Legislatures," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 657-676, November.
    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. Valentino Larcinese & Leonzio Rizzo & Cecilia Testa, 2013. "Why Do Small States Receive More Federal Money? U.S. Senate Representation and the Allocation of Federal Budget," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 257-282, November.

    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. Tiberiu Dragu & Jonathan Rodden, 2010. "Representation and regional redistribution in federations," Working Papers 2010/16, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    2. Valentino Larcinese & Leonzio Rizzo & Cecilia Testa, 2013. "Why Do Small States Receive More Federal Money? U.S. Senate Representation and the Allocation of Federal Budget," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 257-282, November.
    3. Markus Reischmann, 2016. "Empirical Studies on Public Debt and Fiscal Transfers," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 63.
    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. 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.
    6. Valentino Larcinese & Leonzio Rizzo & Cecilia Testa, 2007. "Do Small States Get More Federal Monies? Myth and Reality about the US Senate Malapportionment," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 07/01, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised May 2007.
    7. Imai, Masami, 2022. "Local economic impacts of legislative malapportionment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    8. Josip Glaurdić & Vuk Vuković, 2017. "Granting votes: exposing the political bias of intergovernmental grants using the within-between specification for panel data," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 223-241, April.
    9. Vespa, Emanuel I., 2016. "Malapportionment and multilateral bargaining: An experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 64-74.
    10. Halse, Askill H., 2016. "More for everyone: The effect of local interests on spending on infrastructure," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 41-56.
    11. Deniz Aksoy, 2010. "Who gets what, when, and how revisited: Voting and proposal powers in the allocation of the EU budget," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(2), pages 171-194, June.
    12. Clemens, Jeffrey & Veuger, Stan, 2021. "Politics and the distribution of federal funds: Evidence from federal legislation in response to COVID-19," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    13. Jean Pierre TRANCHANT & Grégoire ROTA-GRAZIOSI & Léandre BASSOLE & Jean-Louis ARCAND, 2006. "The Making of a (vice-) President: Party Politics, Ethnicity, Village Loyalty and Community-Driven Development," Working Papers 200633, CERDI.
    14. Hans Pitlik & Friedrich Schneider & Harald Strotmann, 2006. "Legislative Malapportionment and the Politicization of Germany's Intergovernmental Transfer System," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(6), pages 637-662, November.
    15. 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.
    16. Jennes, Geert & Persyn, Damiaan, 2015. "The effect of political representation on the geographic distribution of income: Evidence using Belgian data," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 178-194.
    17. Sebastian Galiani & Iván Torre & Gustavo Torrens, 2016. "Fiscal Federalism and Legislative Malapportionment: Causal Evidence from Independent but Related Natural Experiments," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 133-159, March.
    18. Dongwon Lee, 2016. "Supermajority rule and bicameral bargaining," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 53-75, October.
    19. 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.
    20. Stratford Douglas & W. Robert Reed, 2013. "A Replication of "The Political Determinants of Federal Expenditure at the State Level (Public Choice, 2005)," Working Papers in Economics 13/31, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Redistribution; federalism; intergovernmental transfers; malapportionment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • H77 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism

    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:ieb:wpaper:doc2010-16. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iebubes.html .

    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.