What did the Earmark Ban Do? Evidence from Intergovernmental Grants

Steven Gordon

Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, 2018, vol. 48, issue 3

Abstract: Critics of the 2011 congressional earmark ban argue that legislators have simply replaced earmarking with other means of directing federal funds to their home districts. I estimate the impact of the ban using data on federal competitive grants to state and local governments. Because several earmark reforms predated the 2011 ban, I test for a break in the relative trends between regions receiving more earmarks versus those receiving fewer earmarks. My results indicate that for grants to local governments, the 2011 ban had no effect. For grants to state governments, I find that the earmark ban of 2011 may have had an impact; I find statistically and economically significant negative effects, suggesting that the earmark ban may have altered the distribution of intergovernmental grants to state governments. I also show that a large bias in earmarks existed between high and low income districts, suggesting that the earmark ban potentially improved equality.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/339914/files/Gordon.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:jrapmc:339914

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.339914

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy from Mid-Continent Regional Science Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().