[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hcx/wpaper/0806.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determinants of the Distribution of Congressional Earmarks Across States

Author

Listed:
  • Melissa Boyle

    (Department of Economics, College of the Holy Cross)

  • Victor Matheson

    (Department of Economics, College of the Holy Cross)

Abstract
Congressional earmarks have been the subject of significant political debate in recent years. Also known as “pork barrel spending,” earmarks are budgetary requests made by a single legislator that typically circumvent the traditional competitive bidding process designed to ensure the efficient use of public dollars. Utilizing annual state-level estimates of pork barrel spending, we briefly examine the factors influencing states’ receipt of earmarked funds from Congress. Results indicate that on average smaller states receive the largest amount of per capita earmarked funding, most likely as a result of their disproportionate influence in the Senate. In addition, the presence of a Republican Congressional delegation increases pork spending in the state. Finally, the tenure of a state’s senior Senator has a large effect on the state’s receipt of earmarked funds. Each additional year of Senate experience by a state’s senior Senator results in a $4.48 increase in earmarked dollars per capita for that state’s residents.

Suggested Citation

  • Melissa Boyle & Victor Matheson, 2008. "Determinants of the Distribution of Congressional Earmarks Across States," Working Papers 0806, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hcx:wpaper:0806
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hcapps.holycross.edu/hcs/RePEc/hcx/HC0806-Boyle-Matheson_Earmarks.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    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.
    2. Hauk, William R. & Wacziarg, Romain, 2007. "Small States, Big Pork," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 2(1), pages 95-106, March.
    3. Alvarez, R Michael & Saving, Jason L, 1997. "Congressional Committees and the Political Economy of Federal Outlays," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 92(1-2), pages 55-73, July.
    4. David M. Drukker, 2003. "Testing for serial correlation in linear panel-data models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(2), pages 168-177, June.
    5. Bernhardt, Dan & Dubey, Sangita & Hughson, Eric, 2004. "Term limits and pork barrel politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(12), pages 2383-2422, December.
    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. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    2. Zheng, Xinye & Li, Fanghua & Song, Shunfeng & Yu, Yihua, 2013. "Central government's infrastructure investment across Chinese regions: A dynamic spatial panel data approach," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 264-276.
    3. Robert Baumann & Bryan Engelhardt & Victor Matheson, 2009. "The Great Macroeconomic Experiment: Assessing the Effects of Fiscal Stimulus Spending on Employment Growth," Working Papers 0910, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    4. Gordon, Steven, 2018. "What did the Earmark Ban Do? Evidence from Intergovernmental Grants," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 48(3), February.

    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. 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.
    2. DeBacker, Jason, 2011. "The price of pork: The seniority trap in the U.S. House," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(1-2), pages 63-78, February.
    3. Tiberiu Dragu & Jonathan Rodden, 2010. "Representation and regional redistribution in federations," Working Papers 2010/16, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    4. Cortney S. Rodet, 2014. "Voter Behavior, Term Limits, and Seniority Advantage in Pork-Barrel Politics," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 170(4), pages 646-683, December.
    5. Alexander Fink & Thomas Stratmann, 2011. "Institutionalized Bailouts and Fiscal Policy: Consequences of Soft Budget Constraints," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 366-395, August.
    6. 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.
    7. José Bercoff & Osvaldo Meloni, 2009. "Federal budget allocation in an emergent democracy: evidence from Argentina," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 65-83, January.
    8. Yugang He & Chunlei Wang, 2022. "Does Buddhist Tourism Successfully Result in Local Sustainable Development?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Dalle Nogare, Chiara & Kauder, Björn, 2017. "Term limits for mayors and intergovernmental grants: Evidence from Italian cities," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-11.
    10. Hamid Boustanifar & Everett Grant & Ariell Reshef, 2018. "Wages and Human Capital in Finance: International Evidence, 1970–2011 [Financial reform: what shakes it? What shapes it?]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 22(2), pages 699-745.
    11. Miguel García-Posada & Juan Mora-Sanguinetti, 2015. "Entrepreneurship and enforcement institutions: disaggregated evidence for Spain," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 49-74, August.
    12. Kelly, Scott & Shipworth, Michelle & Shipworth, David & Gentry, Michael & Wright, Andrew & Pollitt, Michael & Crawford-Brown, Doug & Lomas, Kevin, 2013. "Predicting the diversity of internal temperatures from the English residential sector using panel methods," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 601-621.
    13. Ana Poças & Elias Soukiazis, 2010. "Health Status Determinants in the OECD Countries. A Panel Data Approach with Endogenous Regressors," GEMF Working Papers 2010-04, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.
    14. Ben Lockwood, 2008. "Voting, Lobbying, And The Decentralization Theorem," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 416-431, November.
    15. Perdiguero, Jordi & Jiménez, Juan Luis, 2021. "Price coordination in the Spanish oil market: The monday effect," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    16. Kai Daniel Schmid & Michael Schmidt, 2012. "EMU and the Renaissance of Sovereign Credit Risk Perception," IAW Discussion Papers 87, Institut für Angewandte Wirtschaftsforschung (IAW).
    17. Amalia Cristescu, 2019. "The Impact Of The Aging Population On The Sustainability Of Public Finances," Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 13(2), pages 52-67, DECEMBER.
    18. Koen Jochmans, 2020. "Testing for correlation in error‐component models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(7), pages 860-878, November.
    19. Andrea Vaona, 2016. "A nonparametric panel data approach to the cyclical dynamics of price-cost margins in the fourth Kondratieff wave," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 6(2), pages 155-170, August.
    20. Poumanyvong, Phetkeo & Kaneko, Shinji & Dhakal, Shobhakar, 2012. "Impacts of urbanization on national transport and road energy use: Evidence from low, middle and high income countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 268-277.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    pork barrel spending; pork; earmarks; government spending;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • H50 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - General
    • H61 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt - - - Budget; Budget Systems

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hcx:wpaper:0806. 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: Victor Matheson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deholus.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.