Estimating the impact of gubernatorial partisanship on policy settings and economic outcomes: a regression discontinuity approach
dc.contributor.author | Leigh, Andrew | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2008-12-14T23:40:07Z | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2011-01-05T08:40:41Z | |
dc.date.available | 2008-12-14T23:40:07Z | en_US |
dc.date.available | 2011-01-05T08:40:41Z | |
dc.date.created | 2007-06 | en_US |
dc.date.issued | 2007-06 | en_US |
dc.date.updated | 2015-12-08T08:25:50Z | |
dc.description.abstract | Using panel data from US states over the period 1941-2002, I measure the impact of gubernatorial partisanship on a wide range of different policy settings and economic outcomes. Across 32 measures, there are surprisingly few differences in policy settings, social outcomes and economic outcomes under Democrat and Republican Governors. In terms of policies, Democratic Governors tend to prefer slightly higher minimum wages. Under Republican Governors, incarceration rates are higher, while welfare caseloads are higher under Democratic Governors. In terms of social and economic outcomes, Democratic Governors tend to preside over higher median post-tax income, lower posttax inequality, and lower unemployment rates. However, for 26 of the 32 dependent variables, gubernatorial partisanship does not have a statistically significant impact on policy outcomes and social welfare. I find no evidence of gubernatorial partisan differences in tax rates, welfare generosity, the number of government employees or their salaries, state revenue, incarceration rates, execution rates, pre-tax incomes and inequality, crime rates, suicide rates, and test scores. These results are robust to the use of regression discontinuity estimation, to take account of the possibility of reverse causality. Overall, it seems that Governors behave in a fairly non-ideological manner. | en_AU |
dc.identifier.isbn | 1 921262 27 4 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1442-8636 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1885/47852 | en_AU |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University | en_AU |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Centre for Economic Policy Research. Discussion paper no. 556 | en_US |
dc.source | European Journal of Political Economy | |
dc.subject | median voter theorem | |
dc.subject | partisanship | |
dc.subject | state government | |
dc.subject | taxation | |
dc.subject | expenditure | |
dc.subject | welfare | |
dc.subject | crime | |
dc.subject | growth | |
dc.title | Estimating the impact of gubernatorial partisanship on policy settings and economic outcomes: a regression discontinuity approach | |
dc.type | Working/Technical Paper | en_AU |
dcterms.accessRights | Open Access | en_AU |
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage | 268 | |
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage | 256 | |
local.contributor.affiliation | ANU | en_US |
local.contributor.affiliation | Centre for Economic Policy Research | en_US |
local.contributor.authoremail | repository.admin@anu.edu.au | |
local.contributor.authoruid | Leigh, Andrew, u4170357 | |
local.description.notes | This is a revised version of ANU CEPR Discussion Paper 504, titled ‘What’s the Difference Between a Donkey and an Elephant? Using Panel Data from US States to Estimate the Impact of Partisanship on Policy Settings and Economic Outcomes’ | en_US |
local.description.refereed | no | en_US |
local.identifier.absfor | 140213 - Public Economics- Public Choice | |
local.identifier.absfor | 140219 - Welfare Economics | |
local.identifier.ariespublication | u8410019xPUB85 | |
local.identifier.citationvolume | 24 | |
local.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2007.06.003 | |
local.identifier.scopusID | 2-s2.0-38949201613 | |
local.identifier.uidSubmittedBy | u8410019 | |
local.rights.ispublished | yes | en_US |
local.type.status | Published version | en_AU |