IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v30yi1p189-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Opinion and American Federalism: Perspectives on Taxes, Spending, and Trust—An ACIR Update

Author

Listed:
  • Richard L. Cole
  • John Kincaid

Abstract

The research reported here updates for 1999 some public opinion data previously provided by the U. S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. The 1999 survey results indicate a general continuation of opinion trends established by the late 1970s to the mid-1980s. Local government is viewed as giving citizens the most for their money, followed by state government and the federal government. Americans still regard the federal income tax as the worst tax, followed by the local property tax. Likewise, Americans express the most trust and confidence in local government and the least trust and confidence in the federal government, although confidence in all governments increased over comparable data for 1992. Race and party identification and, in one case, region are significant factors differentiating opinions about the federal, state, and local governments and their taxes. Copyright , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard L. Cole & John Kincaid, 0. "Public Opinion and American Federalism: Perspectives on Taxes, Spending, and Trust—An ACIR Update," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 30(1), pages 189-201.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:30:y::i:1:p:189-201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas J. Hayes, 2014. "Do Citizens Link Attitudes with Preferences? Economic Inequality and Government Spending in the “New Gilded Age”," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(2), pages 468-485, June.

    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:oup:publus:v:30:y::i:1:p:189-201. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    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.