IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v35y2005i1p169-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Opinion on Issues of U.S. Federalism in 2005: End of the Post-2001 Pro-Federal Surge?

Author

Listed:
  • John Kincaid
  • Richard L. Cole

Abstract

This article analyzes public opinion on five areas of federalism-related issues in 2005 and compares the results with findings from previous years. Overall, the results indicate (1) a decline in support for the federal government following the increase in support after the terrorist attacks of 2001 and (2) an increase in support for state and local governments to levels typical of most pre-2001 surveys. The local property tax, however, continues to be identified most often as the worst tax, whereas the state income tax is least often said to be the worst. The federal government is, by far, the level of government most often selected as having too much power today, whereas local government is most often cited as needing more power. Also evident was a decline since 2002 in the public's perception of the respect given to their states in the federal system. Copyright 2005, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • John Kincaid & Richard L. Cole, 2005. "Public Opinion on Issues of U.S. Federalism in 2005: End of the Post-2001 Pro-Federal Surge?," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 35(1), pages 169-185, Winter.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:35:y:2005:i:1:p:169-185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pji007
    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. Heffron, Raphael J., 2013. "Nuclear energy policy in the United States 1990–2010: A federal or state responsibility?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 254-266.

    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:35:y:2005:i:1:p:169-185. 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.