IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/harver/2075.html

Party Discipline and Pork-Barrel Politics

Author

Listed:
  • Gene M. Grossman
  • Elhanan Helpman

Abstract

Polities differ in the extent to which political parties can pre-commit to carry out promised policy actions if they take power. Commitment problems may arise due to a divergence between the ex ante incentives facing national parties that seek to capture control of the legislature and the ex post incentives facing individual legislators, whose interests may be more parochial. We study how differences in "party discipline" shape fiscal policy choices. In particular, we examine the determinants of national spending on local public goods in a three-stage game of campaign rhetoric, voting, and legislative decision-making. We find that the rhetoric and reality of pork-barrel spending, and also the efficiency of the spending regime, bear a non-monotonic relationship to the degree of party discipline.

Suggested Citation

  • Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 2005. "Party Discipline and Pork-Barrel Politics," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 2075, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:fth:harver:2075
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.economics.harvard.edu/pub/hier/2005/HIER2075.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Guccio, Calogero & Mazza, Isidoro, 2014. "On the political determinants of the allocation of funds to heritage authorities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 18-38.
    2. Jeroen Klomp, 2020. "Subsidizing power," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 67(3), pages 300-321, July.
    3. Marco Portmann & David Stadelmann & Reiner Eichenberger, 2010. "District Magnitude and Representation of the Majority?s Preferences: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Popular and Parliamentary Votes," CREMA Working Paper Series 2010-13, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    4. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 2005. "A Protectionist Bias in Majoritarian Politics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(4), pages 1239-1282.
    5. Constantin-Marius APOSTOAIE, 2017. "Relevant Determinants Of The Political Parties’ Environmental Preference," Scientific Annals of Economics and Business (continues Analele Stiintifice), Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 63(3), pages 51-69, January.
    6. Riccardo Crescenzi & George Petrakos, 2016. "The European Union and its neighboring countries: The economic geography of trade, Foreign Direct Investment and development," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(4), pages 581-591, June.
    7. Aaron Hedlund, 2019. "Pork-Barrel Politics and Polarization," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 101(1), pages 57-68.
    8. Antonio Abatemarco & Roberto Dell’Anno, 2020. "Fiscal illusion and progressive taxation with retrospective voting," Economic and Political Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 246-273, April.
    9. Drazen, Allan & Eslava, Marcela, 2006. "Pork Barrel Cycles," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275704, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Roberson, Brian, 2006. "Pork-barrel politics, discriminatory policies and fiscal federalism [Kuhhandel in der Lokalpolitik und der fiskalische Föderalismus]," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2006-15, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    11. Anke S. Kessler, 2014. "Communication in Federal Politics: Universalism, Policy Uniformity, and the Optimal Allocation of Fiscal Authority," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(4), pages 766-805.
    12. Stadelmann, David & Portmann, Marco & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2013. "Quantifying parliamentary representation of constituents’ preferences with quasi-experimental data," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 170-180.
    13. Marco Portmann & David Stadelmann & Reiner Eichenberger, 2012. "District magnitude and representation of the majority’s preferences: Evidence from popular and parliamentary votes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 585-610, June.
    14. Christopher Sean Patrick Magee, 2010. "Would NAFTA have been Approved by the House of Representatives under President Bush? Presidents, Parties, and Trade Policy," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 382-395, May.
    15. Apostoaie Constantin-Marius, 2016. "Relevant Determinants of the Political Parties’ Environmental Preference," Scientific Annals of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 63(s1), pages 51-69, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    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:fth:harver:2075. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ieharus.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.