Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations and Social Welfare Policy

  • Therese J. McGuire
Chapter
Part of the Recent Economic Thought Series book series (RETH, volume 56)

Abstract

Several decades of experience with income redistribution policies have not eradicated the problem of poverty in the U.S. In fact, in the most recent decade there is evidence that the income distribution has become more disparate and that the number of poor has increased (Bradsher, 1995, Atkinson, 1995 and Atkinson, Rainwater, and Smeeding, 1995). These facts have led to a growing frustration with welfare policy among both conservatives and liberals. One possible (partial) source of the ineffectiveness of welfare policy in the U.S. is that responsibility for this government function has been placed at the wrong levels or units of government. In other words, the responsibility for financing and delivering welfare programs may be in the wrong governmental hands. The conventional wisdom has been that redistribution policies should be centralized because of the public good nature of redistribution and because of the potential for migration to undue any redistribution undertaken at the subnational level. Current political thinking in the U.S. and many other developed countries is that subnational levels of government may be more effective at designing and delivering welfare policy because they are closer to their voters and recipient populations and therefore have a better understanding of the needs and tastes of their residents. The issue explored in this chapter is whether the delivery of welfare policy would be improved by decentralization of governmental responsibility.

Keywords

Food Stamp Welfare Program Welfare Policy Supplemental Security Income Income Redistribution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. “Medicaid, AFDC, and State Budgets.” ACIR Issue Brief No. 1 (1995). Washington: 1–4.Google Scholar
  2. Atkinson, A. B. Incomes and the Welfare State: Essays on Britain and Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson, Anthony B., Lee Rainwater and Timothy M. Smeeding. Income Distribution in OECD Countries: Evidence from the Luxembourg Income Study. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1995.Google Scholar
  4. Bixby, Ann Kallman. “Public Social Welfare Expenditures, Fiscal Year 1992.” Social Security Bulletin 58 No. 2 (Summer 1995): 65–73.Google Scholar
  5. Blank, Rebecca M. “The Effect of Welfare and Wage Levels on the Location Decisions of Female-Headed Households.” Journal of Urban Economics 24 No. 2 (September 1988): 186–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blank, Rebecca M., and Maria J. Hanratty. “Responding to Need: A Comparison of Social Safety Nets in Canada and the United States.” In Small Differences that Matter, edited by David Card and Richard B. Freeman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. Bradsher, Keith. “Widest Gap in Incomes? Research Points to U.S.” The New York Times (October 27, 1995): D2.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, Charles C., and Wallace E. Oates. “Assistance to the Poor in a Federal System.” Journal of Public Economics 23 No. 3 (April 1987): 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burtless, Gary. “The Economist’s Lament: Public Assistance in America.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 4 No. 1 (Winter 1990): 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Craig, Steven G. “Welfare Policy: Spending and Program Structure.” In State and Local Finance for the 1990s: A Case Study of Arizona, edited by Therese J. McGuire and Dana Wolfe Naimark. Tempe: Arizona State University, 1991.Google Scholar
  11. Danziger, Sandra K., and Sheldon Danziger. “Will Welfare Recipients Find Work When Welfare Ends?” Urban Institute Welfare Reform Briefs No. 12 (June 1995): 1–4.Google Scholar
  12. Danziger, Sandra K., and Sherrie A. Kossoudji. “When Welfare Ends: Subsistence Strategies of Former GA Recipients.” Ann Arbor, MI: School of Social Work, University of Michigan, February, 1995.Google Scholar
  13. Dickert, Stacy, Scott Houser, and John Karl Scholz. “The Earned Income Tax Credit and Transfer Programs: A Study of Labor Market and Program Participation.” in Tax Policy and the Economy 9, edited by James M. Poterba, 1–50. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research and MIT Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  14. The Economist. “Pete Wilson’s Horn of (Almost) Plenty.” (August 12, 1995): 23.Google Scholar
  15. The Economist. “Congress’s Welfare Cheats.” (October 28, 1995): 18.Google Scholar
  16. Epple, Dennis, and Thomas Romer. “Mobility and Redistribution.” Journal of Political Economy 99 No. 4 (August 1991): 828–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fisher, Ronald C. State and Local Public Finance. Chicago: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1996.Google Scholar
  18. Georges, Christopher. “Depth of Welfare Cuts Under GOP Plan Depends As Much on the States as It Does on Washington.” The Wall Street Journal (August 21, 1995): A10.Google Scholar
  19. Goodspeed, Timothy J. “A Re-examination of the Use of Ability to Pay Taxes by Local Governments.” Journal of Public Economics 38 No. 3 (April 1989): 319–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gramlich, Edward M. “Reforming U.S. Federal Fiscal Arrangements.” In American Domestic Priorities: An Economics Appraisal, edited by John Quigley and Daniel Rubinfeld, 34–69. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  21. Gramlich, Edward M., and Deborah S. Laren. “Migration and Income Redistribution Responsibilities.” The Journal of Human Resources XIX No. 4 (1984): 489–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kilborn, Peter T. “Michigan Puts Poor to Work But Gains Appear Precarious.” The New York Times (October 24, 1995): A1.Google Scholar
  23. Ladd, Helen F., and Fred C. Doolittle. “Which Level of Government Should Assist the Poor?” National Tax Journal 35 No. 3 (September 1982): 323–336.Google Scholar
  24. Levine, Philip B., and David J. Zimmerman. “An Empirical Analysis of the Welfare Magnet Debate Using the NLSY.” NBER Working Paper No. 5264. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, September, 1995.Google Scholar
  25. McGuire, Therese J. “Federal Aid to States and Localities and the Appropriate Competitive Framework.” In Competition Among States and Local Governments: Efficiency and Equity in American Federalism, edited by Daphne A. Kenyon and John Kincaid, 153–166. Washington: The Urban Institute Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  26. Moffitt, Robert. “Incentive Effects of the U.S. Welfare System: A Review.” Journal of Economic Literature 30 No. 1 (March 1992): 1–61.Google Scholar
  27. Oakland, William H. “Income Redistribution in a Federal System.” In Local Provision of Public Services: The Tiebout Model after Twenty-five Years, edited by George Zodrow. City: Academic Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  28. Oates, Wallace E. Fiscal Federalism. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Jovanovich, 1972.Google Scholar
  29. Oates, Wallace E. “Fiscal Federalism: An Overview.” In Public Finance with Several Levels of Government, edited by Remy Prud’homme. City: Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  30. Orr, Larry L. “Income Transfers as a Public Good: An Application to AFDC.” American Economic Review 66 No. 3 (June 1976): 359–371.Google Scholar
  31. Pauly, Mark V. “Income Redistribution as a Local Public Good.” Journal of Public Economics 2 No. 1 (February 1973): 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pear, Robert. “Senate Finance Panel Approves a Vast Restructuring of Welfare.” The New York Times (May 27, 1995): 1.Google Scholar
  33. Plotnick, Robert D., and Richard F. Winters. “A Politico-Economic Theory of Income Redistribution.” The American Political Science Review 79 (1985): 458–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Slemrod, Joel. “The Optimal Progressivity of the Minnesota Tax System.” In Final Report of the Minnesota Tax Study Commission, Volume 2, Staff Papers, edited by Robert D. Ebel and Therese J. McGuire. St. Paul: Butterworths, 1986.Google Scholar
  35. Tiebout, Charles, M. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.” Journal of Political Economy 64 No. 5 (October 1956): 416–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Walker, James R. “Migration Among Low-income Households: Helping the Witch Doctors Reach Consensus.” IRP Working Paper No. 1031–1094.Google Scholar
  37. Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty, April, 1994.Google Scholar
  38. Wildasin, David E. “Income Redistribution in a Common Labor Market.” The American Economic Review 81 No. 4 (September 1991): 757–774.Google Scholar
  39. Zedlewski, Sheila, and Isabel V. Sawhill. “Assessing the Personal Responsibility Act.” Urban Lnstitute Welfare Reform Briefs No. 5 (May 1995): 1–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Therese J. McGuire

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations