IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v73y2007i3p754-769.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Government Form and Performance: Fiscal Illusion and Administrative Ability in U.S. Counties

Author

Listed:
  • Geoffrey K. Turnbull

Abstract

Key differences in local government organizational form lie in separation of powers versus unified powers and elected versus professional chief executive officers (CEOs). This paper studies how these features lead to differences in fiscal illusion and production cost. Evidence from U.S. counties indicates that there is less fiscal illusion under separation of powers, which by itself reduces spending. Separation of powers, however, leads to greater overall spending when compared with unified governments. The inelastic public demand, therefore, implies that separation of powers leads to services being provided at greater cost than under governments with unified powers. Similar conclusions hold for professional relative to elected CEOs.

Suggested Citation

  • Geoffrey K. Turnbull, 2007. "Government Form and Performance: Fiscal Illusion and Administrative Ability in U.S. Counties," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(3), pages 754-769, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:73:y:2007:i:3:p:754-769
    DOI: 10.1002/j.2325-8012.2007.tb00800.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2325-8012.2007.tb00800.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/j.2325-8012.2007.tb00800.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chang, Chinkun & Turnbull, Geoffrey K, 2002. "Bureaucratic Behavior in the Local Public Sector: A Revealed Preference Approach," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 113(1-2), pages 191-210, October.
    2. Richard Wagner, 1976. "Revenue structure, fiscal illusion, and budgetary choice," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 45-61, March.
    3. Werner W. Pommerehne & Bruno S. Frey, 1976. "Two Approaches To Estimating Public Expenditures," Public Finance Review, , vol. 4(4), pages 395-407, October.
    4. Pommerehne, Werner W., 1978. "Institutional approaches to public expenditure : Empirical evidence from Swiss municipalities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 255-280, April.
    5. Turnbull, Geoffrey K & Djoundourian, Salpie S, 1994. "The Median Voter Hypothesis: Evidence from General Purpose Local Governments," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 81(3-4), pages 223-240, December.
    6. Brennan,Geoffrey & Buchanan,James M., 2006. "The Power to Tax," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521027922, January.
    7. Grosskopf Shawna & Hayes Kathy, 1993. "Local Public Sector Bureaucrats and Their Input Choices," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 151-166, March.
    8. Geoffrey K. Turnbull & Chinkun Chang, 1998. "The Median Voter According to GARP," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 1001-1010, April.
    9. Turnbull, Geoffrey K., 1998. "The Overspending and Flypaper Effects of Fiscal Illusion: Theory and Empirical Evidence," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 1-26, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marc Baudry & Matthieu Leprince & Cyriaque Moreau, 2002. "Préférences révélées, bien public local et électeur médian : tests sur données françaises," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 156(5), pages 125-146.
    2. Geoffrey Turnbull & Gyusuck Geon, 2006. "Local government internal structure, external constraints and the median voter," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 129(3), pages 487-506, December.
    3. Peter M. Mitias & Geoffrey K. Turnbull, 2001. "Grant Illusion, Tax Illusion, and Local Government Spending," Public Finance Review, , vol. 29(5), pages 347-368, September.
    4. Eric J. Brunner & Stephen L. Ross, 2007. "How Decisive Is the Decisive Voter?," Working papers 2007-28, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2008.
    5. Benoît Le Maux, 2009. "Governmental behavior in representative democracy: a synthesis of the theoretical literature," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 447-465, December.
    6. Fuest, Clemens & Huber, Bernd, 2001. "Tax Competition and Tax Coordination in a Median Voter Model," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 107(1-2), pages 97-113, April.
    7. Eric J. Brunner & Stephen L. Ross, 2009. "Is the Median Voter Decisive? Evidence of 'Ends Against the Middle' From Referenda Voting Patterns," Working papers 2009-02, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised May 2010.
    8. Geoffrey K. Turnbull & Michael T. Tasto, 2008. "Independent Cities and Counties in Virginia: Substitute Jurisdictions?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(1), pages 53-66, January.
    9. Brunner, Eric J. & Ross, Stephen L., 2010. "Is the median voter decisive? Evidence from referenda voting patterns," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 898-910, December.
    10. Geoffrey K. Turnbull & Robert F. Salvino & Michael T. Tasto, 2014. "Does the power to use eminent domain for economic development actually enhance economic development?," Chapters, in: Robert F. Salvino Jr. & Michael T. Tasto & Gregory M. Randolph (ed.), Entrepreneurial Action, Public Policy, and Economic Outcomes, chapter 7, pages 119-133, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Rhee, Se-Koo, 1996. "The impact of intergovernmental grants-in-aid on public school expenditure under the segregated school system," ISU General Staff Papers 1996010108000012396, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Geoffrey K. Turnbull & Chinkun Chang, 1998. "The Median Voter According to GARP," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 1001-1010, April.
    13. Turnbull Geoffrey K & Salvino Robert F., 2009. "Do Broader Eminent Domain Powers Increase Government Size?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 785-806, December.
    14. D.P. Doessel & Abbas Valadkhani, 2002. "Public Finance and The Size of Government: A Literature Review and Econometric Results for Fiji," School of Economics and Finance Discussion Papers and Working Papers Series 108, School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology.
    15. Lars Feld & Christoph Schaltegger, 2010. "Political stability and fiscal policy: time series evidence for the Swiss federal level since 1849," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 144(3), pages 505-534, September.
    16. Rebecca J. Campbell & Geoffrey K. Turnbull, 2003. "On Government Structure and Spending: The Effects of Management Form and Separation of Powers," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(1), pages 23-34, January.
    17. Michael A. Nelson, 1986. "Voter Perceptions of the Cost of Government: the Case of Local School Expenditures in Louisiana," Public Finance Review, , vol. 14(1), pages 48-68, January.
    18. Deborah A. Carroll, 2005. "Are State Governments Prepared for Fiscal Crises? A Look at Revenue Diversification during the 1990s," Public Finance Review, , vol. 33(5), pages 603-633, September.
    19. Stanley L. Winer & Walter Hettich, 2002. "The Political Economy of Taxation: Positive and Normative Analysis when Collective Choice Matters," Carleton Economic Papers 02-11, Carleton University, Department of Economics, revised 2004.
    20. Russell Sobel & George Crowley, 2014. "Do intergovernmental grants create ratchets in state and local taxes?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 167-187, January.

    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:wly:soecon:v:73:y:2007:i:3:p:754-769. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    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.