IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v51y2021i2p283-306..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Undermining Governors: Argentina’s Double-Punishment Federal Spending Strategy

Author

Listed:
  • Tracy Beck Fenwick
  • Lucas González

Abstract

Throughout Latin American federations, programmatic welfare spending is increasingly nationally oriented and bureaucratically delivered. By explaining the logic and the effects of combining two types of federal spending, discretionary and non-discretionary, this article uncovers an additional driver that contributes to understanding policymaking and its implementation not only in Argentina, but potentially in other robust federal systems such as Brazil, Canada, and the United States. Using original data on federal infrastructure and programmatic social welfare spending for the twenty-four provinces of Argentina between 2003 and 2015, we provide empirical evidence that both forms of spending penalize opposition districts and more populated urban provinces (regardless of partisan affinity), and thus undercut the ability of key governors to become future presidential challengers. This research suggests that presidents of territorially diverse federations with strong governors can utilize the dual-punishment spending strategy to alter the balance of power, reinforcing the dominance of the center.

Suggested Citation

  • Tracy Beck Fenwick & Lucas González, 2021. "Undermining Governors: Argentina’s Double-Punishment Federal Spending Strategy," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 51(2), pages 283-306.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:51:y:2021:i:2:p:283-306.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjaa035
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernesto Calvo & Maria Victoria Murillo, 2004. "Who Delivers? Partisan Clients in the Argentine Electoral Market," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(4), pages 742-757, October.
    2. Ana L. De La O, 2013. "Do Conditional Cash Transfers Affect Electoral Behavior? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Mexico," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Hicken, Allen & Kollman, Ken & Simmons, Joel W., 2016. "Party System Nationalization and the Provision of Public Health Services," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 573-594, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Kriner, Douglas L. & Reeves, Andrew, 2012. "The Influence of Federal Spending on Presidential Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 348-366, May.
    6. Alejandro Bonvecchi & Germán Lodola, 2011. "The Dual Logic of Intergovernmental Transfers: Presidents, Governors, and the Politics of Coalition-Building in Argentina," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 41(2), pages 179-206, Spring.
    7. repec:gig:joupla:v:6:y:2014:i:2:p:73-105 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Peter Spáč, 2021. "Pork barrel politics and electoral returns at the local level," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(3), pages 479-501, September.
    2. Michael Rochlitz, 2016. "Political Loyalty Vs Economic Performance: Evidence from Machine Politics in Russia’S Regions," HSE Working papers WP BRP 34/PS/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Harry Pickard, 2021. "The Impact of Career Politicians: Evidence from US Governors," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 103-125, February.
    4. Yuriko Takahashi, 2017. "Poverty, Clientelism and Democratic Accountability in Mexico," Working Papers 1620, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    5. Enikolopov, Ruben, 2014. "Politicians, bureaucrats and targeted redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 74-83.
    6. Lehmann, M. Christian & Matarazzo, Hellen, 2019. "Voters’ response to in-kind transfers: Quasi-experimental evidence from prescription drug cost-sharing in Brazil," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    7. Marina Dodlova & Anna Gioblas, 2017. "Regime type, inequality, and redistributive transfers in developing countries," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-30, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Subhasish Dey & Kunal Sen, 2016. "Is partisan alignment electorally rewarding? Evidence from village council elections in India," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-063-16, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    9. Jeremy Bowles & Horacio Larreguy & Shelley Liu, 2020. "How Weakly Institutionalized Parties Monitor Brokers in Developing Democracies: Evidence from Postconflict Liberia," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 952-967, October.
    10. Benjamin Marx, 2018. "Elections as Incentives: Project Completion and Visibility in African Politics," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03873801, HAL.
    11. Fuchs, Alan & Rodriguez-Chamussy, Lourdes, 2014. "Voter response to natural disaster aid : quasi-experimental evidence from drought relief payments in Mexico," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6836, The World Bank.
    12. Valeria Palanza, 2020. "Presidents versus Federalism in the National Legislative Process: The Argentine Senate in Comparative Perspective by Hirokazu Kikuchi , Cham, Palgrave Macmillan, 2018, xx + 295 pp," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 58(4), pages 409-413, December.
    13. Nunnari, Salvatore, 2021. "Dynamic legislative bargaining with veto power: Theory and experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 186-230.
    14. Hare Krisna Kundo, 2018. "Micro politics of Social Safety Net Programmes: The case of the Food‐For‐Work Programme in Bangladesh," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 36(S2), pages 815-830, September.
    15. Baldwin, Kate & Bhavnani, Rikhil R., 2013. "Ancillary Experiments: Opportunities and Challenges," WIDER Working Paper Series 024, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. Rhode, Paul W. & Snyder, Jr., James M. & Strumpf, Koleman, 2018. "The arsenal of democracy: Production and politics during WWII," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 145-161.
    17. Patricia Justino & Bruno Martorano, 2016. "Redistribution, inequality and political participation: Evidence from Mexico during the 2008 financial crisis," WIDER Working Paper Series 140, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    18. 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.
    19. Dodlova, Marina & Giolbas, Anna & Lay, Jann, 2016. "Non-Contributory Social Transfer Programmes in Developing Countries: A New Data Set and Research Agenda," GIGA Working Papers 290, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    20. 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.

    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:oup:publus:v:51:y:2021:i:2:p:283-306.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    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.