IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/pbudge/v44y2024i1p14-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Voter support for bond referenda: Does it matter if costs are presented as aggregate vs. personal costs?

Author

Listed:
  • Corey Lang
  • Shanna Pearson‐Merkowitz
  • Zachary Scott

Abstract

We explore whether voters' willingness to approve government spending in bond elections is affected by how costs are presented. Using an original survey experiment, we examine willingness to approve bonds, randomizing both the total cost of the bond and the framing of the cost as either a personal cost or an aggregate amount. We find that respondents are less supportive of bonds when the bond is framed as a personal expense and that respondents are more cost‐responsive when they see personal costs. There is also substantial heterogeneity based on the respondent's partisanship and the policy domain of the bond.

Suggested Citation

  • Corey Lang & Shanna Pearson‐Merkowitz & Zachary Scott, 2024. "Voter support for bond referenda: Does it matter if costs are presented as aggregate vs. personal costs?," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 14-37, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:44:y:2024:i:1:p:14-37
    DOI: 10.1111/pbaf.12354
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/pbaf.12354
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/pbaf.12354?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:pbudge:v:44:y:2024:i:1:p:14-37. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0275-1100 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.