The Determinants of Progressive Era Reform: The Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906
AbstractWe examine three theories of Progressive Era regulation: public interest, industry capture, and information manipulation by the federal bureaucracy and muckraking press. Based on analysis of qualitative legislative histories and econometric evidence, we argue that the adoption of the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act was due to all three factors. Select producer groups sought regulation to tilt the competitive playing field to their advantage. Progressive reform interests desired regulation to reduce uncertainty about food and drug quality. Additionally, rent-seeking by the muckraking press and its bureaucratic allies played a key role in the timing of the legislation. We also find that because the interests behind regulation could not shape the enforcing agency or the legal environment in which enforcement took place, these groups did not ultimately benefit from regulation in the ways originally anticipated.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 10984.
Date of creation: Dec 2004
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Marc Law, Gary D. Libecap. "The Determinants of Progressive Era Reform. The Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906," in Edward L. Glaeser and Claudia Goldin, editors, "Corruption and Reform: Lessons from America's Economic History" University of Chicago Press (2006)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Marc Law & Gary D. Libecap, 2006. "The Determinants of Progressive Era Reform. The Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906," NBER Chapters, in: Corruption and Reform: Lessons from America's Economic History, pages 319-342 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
- N4 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation
- L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2004-12-20 (All new papers)
- NEP-EDU-2004-12-20 (Education)
- NEP-HIS-2004-12-20 (Business, Economic & Financial History)
- NEP-REG-2004-12-20 (Regulation)
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.:
- Law, Marc T., 2003. "The Origins of State Pure Food Regulation," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(04), pages 1103-1130, December.
- Gary D. Libecap, 1991.
"The Rise of the Chicago Packers and the Origins of Meat Inspection and Antitrust,"
NBER Historical Working Papers
0029, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Libecap, Gary D, 1992. "The Rise of the Chicago Packers and the Origins of Meat Inspection and Antitrust," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(2), pages 242-62, April.
- Edward L. Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2003.
"The Rise of the Regulatory State,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 401-425, June.
- Edward L. Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2001. "The Rise of the Regulatory State," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1934, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Edward L. Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2001. "The Rise of the Regulatory State," NBER Working Papers 8650, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Olmstead, Alan L. & Rhode, Paul W., 2004. "The : Disease Contagion in an Era of Regulatory Uncertainty," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(04), pages 929-963, December.
- Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
- Alan L. Olmstead & Paul W. Rhode, 2004. "The “Tuberculous Cattle Trust”: Disease Contagion in an Era of Regulatory Uncertainty," ICER Working Papers 16-2004, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
- Akerlof, George A, 1970. "The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500, August.
- Sukkoo Kim, 2001. "Markets and Multiunit Firms from an American Historical Perspective," NBER Working Papers 8232, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- McCluskey, Jill J., 1999.
"A Game Theoretic Approach to Organic Foods: An Analysis of Asymmetric Information and Policy,"
2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia
123706, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
- McCluskey, Jill J., 2000. "A Game Theoretic Approach To Organic Foods: An Analysis Of Asymmetric Information And Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(1), April.
- Poitras, Marc & Sutter, Daniel, 2009. "Advertiser pressure and control of the news: The decline of muckraking revisited," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 944-958, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.