Skip to main content
×
×
Home

How bureaucratic leadership shapes policy outcomes: partisan politics and affluent citizens’ incomes in the American states

  • Daniel Berkowitz (a1) and George A. Krause (a2)
Abstract

We maintain that political institutions’ policy objectives are best met under conditions when they are unified, and also when their administrative leadership is effective. We apply this argument to the understanding of how unified Democratic and Republican governments in the American states have influenced the incomes of affluent citizens. We find that affluent income gains occur under unified Republican state governments when compensation to executive agency heads is sufficiently high. These income gains are notable relative to both divided and unified partisan control of state governments. The evidence highlights the asymmetric role that bureaucratic leadership plays in attaining policy outcomes consistent with political institutions’ policy preferences, while underscoring the limits of electoral institutions to shape policy outcomes of their own accord. Efforts to lower the capacity of the administrative leadership constrain unified political institutions from converting their policy objectives into policy outcomes.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      How bureaucratic leadership shapes policy outcomes: partisan politics and affluent citizens’ incomes in the American states
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      How bureaucratic leadership shapes policy outcomes: partisan politics and affluent citizens’ incomes in the American states
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      How bureaucratic leadership shapes policy outcomes: partisan politics and affluent citizens’ incomes in the American states
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author. Email: gkrause@uga.edu
References
Hide All
Abney, G Lauth, TP (1986) The Politics of State and City Administration. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Acemoglu, D, Robinson, JA Torvik, R (2013) Why Do Voters Dismantle Checks and Balances? Review of Economic Studies 80, 845875.
Atkinson, AB Piketty, T (eds.) (2010) Top Incomes: A Global Perspective. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Barrilleaux, C, Holbrook, TM Langer, L (2002) Electoral Competition, Legislative Balance, and American Welfare State Policy. American Journal of Political Science 46, 415427.
Bartels, LM (2008) Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Beck, N Katz, JN (2011) Modeling Dynamics in Time-Series Cross-Section Political Economy Data. Annual Review of Political Science 14, 331352.
Berry, WD, Evan, JR, Fording, RC Hanson, RL (1998) Measuring Citizen and Government Ideology in the American States, 1960−1993. American Journal of Political Science 42, 327348.
Boushey, GT McGrath, RJ (2017) Experts, Amateurs, and Bureaucratic Influence in the American States. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 27, 85103.
Bowling, CJ Wright, DS (1998) Change and Continuity in State Administration: Administrative Leadership across Four Decades. Public Administration Review 58, 429444.
Brady, D Leicht, KT (2008) Party to Inequality: Right Party Power and Income Inequality in Affluent Western Democracies. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 26, 77106.
Brudney, JL, Fernandez, S, Ryu, JE Wright, DS (2005) Exploring and Explaining Contracting Out: Patterns Among the American States. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15, 393419.
Brudney, JL Wright, DS (2010) The “Revolt in Dullsville”: Lessons for Theory, Practice, and Research from the American State Administrators Project, 1964-2008. Public Administration Review 70, 2637.
Burkhauser, RV, Feng, S, Jenkins, SP Larrimore, J (2012) Recent Trends in Top Income Shares in the United States: Reconciling Estimates from March CPS and IRS Tax Return Data. Review of Economics and Statistics 94, 371388.
Cho, C-L Wright, DS (2007) Perceptions of Federal Aid Impacts on State Agencies: Patterns, Trends, and Variations Across the 20th Century. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 37, 101130.
Conlan, TJ (1998) From New Federalism to Devolution: Twenty-Five Years of Intergovernmental Reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Dye, TR (1990) American Federalism: Competition Among Governments. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Eisinger, PK (1988) The Rise of the Entrepreneurial State: State and Local Economic Development Policy in the United States . Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Epstein, DL O’Halloran, S (1999) Delegating Powers: A Transaction Cost Politics Approach to Policymaking Under Separated Powers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
The Federalist Papers (1982) The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. New York: Bantam Books.
Fukuyama, F (2013) What is Governance? Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 26, 347368.
Gailmard, S Patty, JW (2013) Learning While Governing: Expertise and Accountability in the Executive Branch. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Gelman, A, Kenworthy, L Su, Y-S (2010) Income Inequality and Partisan Voting in the United States. Social Science Quarterly 91, 12031219.
Gilens, M (2012) Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hacker, JS Pierson, P (2010) Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer and Turned its Back on the Middle Class. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Hammond, TH Knott, JH (1996) Who Controls the Bureaucracy? Presidential Power, Congressional Dominance, Legal Constraints, and Bureaucratic Autonomy in a Model of Institutional Policymaking. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 12, 119166.
Huber, JD Shipan, CR (2002) Deliberate Discretion? The Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Huber, JD McCarty, N (2004) Bureaucratic Capacity, Delegation, and Political Reform. American Political Science Review 98, 481494.
Im, KS, Pesaran, MH Kim, Y (2003) Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels. Journal of Econometrics 115, 5374.
Kaufman, H (1981) The Administrative Behavior of Federal Bureau Chiefs. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Kelleher, CA Yackee, SW (2009) A Political Consequence of Contracting: Organized Interests and State Agency Decision Making. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19, 579602.
Kelly, NJ Witko, C (2012) Federalism and American Inequality. Journal of Politics 74, 414426.
Kenworthy, L Pontusson, J (2005) Rising Inequality and the Politics of Redistribution in Affluent Countries. Perspectives on Politics 3, 449471.
Krause, GA Woods, ND (2014) Policy Delegation, Comparative Institutional Capacity, and Administrative Politics in the American States. In Haider-Markel DP (ed.), Oxford Handbook of State and Local Government . New York: Oxford University Press, 363396.
Langer, L (2001) The Consequences of State Economic Development Strategies on Income Distribution in the American States, 1976-1994. American Politics Research 29, 392415.
Leigh, A (2007) “How Closely Do Top Income Shares Track Other Measures of Inequality? Economic Journal 117(524): F619F633.
Long, NE (1949) Power and Administration. Public Administration Review 9, 257264.
Lowery, A (2012) Costs Seen in Income Inequality. New York Times, 17 October. Section, Page: B1, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/business/economy/income-inequality-may-take-toll-on-growth.html (accessed 19 October 2012).
Lowery, DC Gray, V (2001) The Institutionalization of State Communities of Organized Interests. Political Research Quarterly 54, 265284.
Meltzer, AH Richard, SF (1981) A Rational Theory of the Size of Government. Journal of Political Economy 89, 914927.
Mikesell, J (2007) Changing State Capacity and Tax Effort in an Era of Devolving Government, 1981−2003. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 37, 532550.
Miller, GJ Whitford, AB (2016) Above Politics: Bureaucratic Discretion and Credible Commitment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Moncrief, G Squire, P (2013) Why States Matter? An Introduction to State Politics. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
National Association of State Personnel Executives (2013) Total Rewards: Preparing to Pay the Next Generation of State Government Workers, http://www.naspe.net/assets/docs/Research-and-Publications/HR/wp_total%20rewards.pdf (accessed 19 January 2018).
National Association of State Personnel Executives (2016) NASPE 2016 Top Five Issues Panel Discussion, http://www.naspe.net/assets/docs/top5/2016%20white%20paper.pdf (accessed 19 January 2018).
Persson, T, Roland, G Tabellini, G (1997) Separation of Powers and Political Accountability. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112, 11631202.
Peters, BG Pierre, J (1998) Governance Without Governing? Rethinking Public Administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2, 223243.
Piketty, T Saez, E (2003) Income Inequality in the United States, 1913− 1998. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, 139.
Piketty, T Saez, E (2006) The Evolution of Top Incomes: A Historical and International Perspective. American Economic Review 96, 200205.
Reed, WR, Rogers, CL Skidmore, M (2011) On Estimating Marginal Tax Rates for U.S. States. National Tax Journal 64, 5984.
Rosen, H (2002) Public Finance, 6th ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Saez, E, Slemrod, J Giertz, SH (2012) The Elasticity of Taxable Income with Respect to Marginal Tax Rates: A Critical Review. Journal of Economic Literature 50, 350.
Salamon, LM (ed.) (2002) The Tools of Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Scheve, K Stasavage, D (2009) Institutions, Partisanship, and Inequality in the Long Run. World Politics 61, 215253.
Schneider, SK, Jacoby, WG Coggburn, JD (1997) The Structure of Bureaucratic Decision in the American States. Public Administration Review 57, 240249.
Seifter, M (2017) Gubernatorial Administration. Harvard Law Review 131, 483542.
Seifter, M (2018) Further from the People? The Puzzle of State Administration. NYU Law Review 93, 107174.
Sommeiller, E Price, M (2014) The Increasingly Unequal States of America: Income Inequality by State, 1917 to 2011. Economic Analysis and Research Network (EARN) Report, http://www.epi.org/publication/unequal-states/ (accessed 13 February 2014).
Stark, KJ (2010) Rich States, Poor States: Assessing the Design and Effect of a U.S. Fiscal Equalization Regime. Tax Law Review 63, 9571008.
Teodoro, MP (2011) Bureaucratic Ambition: Careers, Motives, and the Innovative Administrator . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Terry, LD (2005) The Thinning of Administrative Institutions in the Hollow State. Administration & Society 37, 426444.
Texas State Auditor’s Office (John Keel, CPA, State Auditor) (2014) An Audit Report on The Texas Enterprise Fund at the Office of the Governor. SAO Report No. 15-003, https://www.sao.texas.gov/reports/main/15-003.pdf (accessed 20 February 2018).
US Government Accountability Office (2010) State and Local Governments: Fiscal Pressures Could Have Implications for Future Delivery of Intergovernmental Programs. Report to the Ranking Member, Committee on the Budget, House of Representatives. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office.
Volden, C (2002) A Formal Model of the Politics of Delegation in the Separation of Powers System. American Journal of Political Science 46, 111133.
Volscho, TW Kelly, NJ (2012) The Rise of the Super−Rich: Power Resources, Taxes, Financial Markets, and the Dynamics of the Top 1 Percent, 1949−2008. American Sociological Review 77, 679699.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Public Policy
  • ISSN: 0143-814X
  • EISSN: 1469-7815
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-public-policy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Berkowitz and Krause Dataset
Dataset

 Unknown
PDF
Supplementary materials

Berkowitz and Krause supplementary material
Berkowitz and Krause supplementary material 1

 PDF (427 KB)
427 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed