Constitutional Political Economy

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 407–433 | Cite as

Loss of control: legislature changes and the state–local relationship

Original Paper
  • 184 Downloads

Abstract

There are a variety of methods that state legislatures can use to pass legislation which relates to municipalities. This paper explores why, how and when states changed their constitutions from allowing special legislation for municipalities to requiring general laws which would apply to all municipalities. Historians have put forward several explanations for why special legislation was harder to maintain as the nineteenth century progressed. A new way of framing the story is presented here by considering how the passage of special legislation was maintained through a logroll; legislators formed a coalition to vote on each other’s local legislation. As the size of the legislature expanded and the composition of the legislature changed, it may have been harder for legislators to maintain a coalition in order to logroll each other’s proposed local legislation. The previous theories along with the new one presented here are empirically tested. Evidence suggests a link between the size of the state legislature and the probability of instituting general legislation for municipalities, indicating that one motivation for adopting general laws was the dissolution of a stable logroll.

Keywords

Logroll Special legislation General legislation Constitutional change Apportionment 

JEL Classification

D72 H7 N4 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank John Wallis, Jenny Bourne and Jac Heckelman for many helpful comments on earlier versions. Many thanks to the participants of the 2013 AALAC Mellon 23 Workshop in Economic History, participants in the Wake Forest seminar series, and colleagues at the CSWEP Regional Mentoring workshop in Public Economics, for insightful comments and suggestions.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baron, D. P., & Ferejohn, J. A. (1989). Bargaining in legislatures. The American Political Science Review, 83, 1181–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burnham, W. D. (1984). Partisan Division of American State Governments, 1834–1985 [Computer file]. Conducted by Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ICPSR Ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
  3. Burns, N. (1994). The formation of American local governments. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Carrubba, Clifford. J., & Volden, C. (2000). Coalitional politics and logrolling in legislative institutions. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 261–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dinan, J. J. (2006). The American State constitutional tradition. Kansas: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  6. Dixon, R. G. (1968). Democratic representation: Reapportionment in law and politics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Druckman, J. N., Martin, L. W., & Thies, M. F. (2005). Influence without confidence: Upper chambers and government formation. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30, 529–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gentzkow, M., Jesse, M. S., & Michael, S. (2011a). Counts of US daily newspapers by city and political affiliation, 1869–2004 [Computer file]. ICPSR30261-v4. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2011-07-28. doi: 10.3886/ICPSR30261.v4
  9. Gentzkow, M., Shapiro, J. M., & Sinkinson, M. (2011b). The effect of newspaper entry and exit on electoral politics. American Economic Review, 101, 2980–3018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Griffith, E. S. (1974). Counts of US daily newspapers by City and Political Affiliation, 1869–2004. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Griffith, E. S. (1976). A history of American City government: The formation of traditions, 1775–1870. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. Haines, M. R. (2005). the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. Historical, demographic, economic, and social data: The United States, 1790–2000 [Computer file]. ICPSR02896-v2. Hamilton, NY: Colgate University/Ann Arbor: MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producers], 2004. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2005-04-29. Google Scholar
  13. Hennessey, J. (2009). Endogenous institutional change: The transformation of the state–local relationship in the United States. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  14. Hilt, E. (2008). When did ownership separate from control? Corporate governance in the early-nineteeth century. Journal of Economic History, 68, 645–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Howard, G. E. (1904). A history of matrimonial institutions chiefly in England and the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Ireland, R. M. (2004). The problem of local, private, and special legislation in the nineteenth-century United States. The American Journal of Legal History, 46, 271–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keiter, R. B., & Newcomb, T. (1993). The Wyoming state constitution: A reference guide. Santa Barbara: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kimball, E. (1922). State and municipal government in the United States. Boston: Ginn and Company.Google Scholar
  19. Leser, O. (1904). Report on the evils of special and local legislation. Transactions of the Maryland State Bar Association, pp. 160–185.Google Scholar
  20. McBain, H. L. (1916). The law and practice of municipal home rule. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Orth, S. P. (1906). Special legislation. The Atlantic Monthly, 97, 69–76.Google Scholar
  22. Pollock, I. L. (1917). Special legislation in Iowa. Iowa Journal of History and Politics, 15, 8–41.Google Scholar
  23. Reinsch, Paul. S. (1907). American legislatures and legislative methods. New York: The Century Co.Google Scholar
  24. Sechrist, R. P. (2000). Basic geographic and historic data for interfacing ICPSR data sets, 1620–1983 [United States] [Computer file]. ICPSR08159-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi: 10.3886/ICPSR08159.v1.
  25. Shammas, C. (2002). A history of household government in America. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
  26. Smith, J. V. (1851). Report of the debates and proceedings of the convention for the revision of the constitution of the State of Ohio, 1850–1851 (Vols. 1 and 2). Columbus: S. Medary. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/291219723.
  27. Sturm, A. (1982). The development of American state constitutions. Publius, 12, 57–98.Google Scholar
  28. Tarr, G. A. (1998). Understanding state constitutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Teaford, J. C. (1979). Special legislation and the cities, 1865–1900. The American Journal of Legal History, 23, 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Teaford, C. (1984). The unheralded triumph. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Weingast, B. R. (1979). A rational choice perspective on congressional norms. American Journal of Political Science, 23, 245–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilcox, D. F. (1906). The American city: A problem in democracy. New York: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
  33. Zagarri, R. (1987). The politics of size: Representation in the United States, 1776–1850. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsFurman UniversityGreenvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations