IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v88y2022i4p1599-1625.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting the effect of supermajority requirements on fiscal outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • William B. Hankins

Abstract

I use matching methods on a panel of U.S. states over the period 1960–2008 to test whether the adoption of a supermajority requirement impacts state‐level expenditures and tax revenue. While two‐way fixed effects (TWFE) models show that general expenditures, welfare expenditures, and total tax revenue per capita are lower following adoption of a supermajority requirement, I also find evidence of heterogeneous treatment effects, and worse, violation of the common trends assumption. Matching estimates fail to support the conclusions of the TWFE models, suggesting that supermajority requirements do not have a robust effect on government expenditures or tax revenue.

Suggested Citation

  • William B. Hankins, 2022. "Revisiting the effect of supermajority requirements on fiscal outcomes," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(4), pages 1599-1625, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:88:y:2022:i:4:p:1599-1625
    DOI: 10.1002/soej.12569
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12569
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/soej.12569?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. Knight, Brian G., 2000. "Supermajority voting requirements for tax increases: evidence from the states," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 41-67, April.
    2. Dongwon Lee & Thomas E. Borcherding & Youngho Kang, 2014. "Public Spending and the Paradox of Supermajority Rule," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(3), pages 614-632, January.
    3. Pamela Jakiela, 2021. "Simple Diagnostics for Two-Way Fixed Effects," Papers 2103.13229, arXiv.org.
    4. David M. Primo, 2006. "Stop Us Before We Spend Again: Institutional Constraints On Government Spending," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 269-312, November.
    5. Gordon Tullock, 1959. "Problems of Majority Voting," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(6), pages 571-571.
    6. Pamela Jakiela, 2021. "Simple Diagnostics for Two-Way Fixed Effects," Department of Economics Working Papers 2021-05, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    7. Paul Pecorino, 2018. "Supermajority rule, the law of 1/n, and government spending: a synthesis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 19-36, April.
    8. repec:wly:soecon:v:80:3:y:2014:p:614-632 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Clément de Chaisemartin & Xavier d'Haultfoeuille & Yannick Guyonvarch, 2019. "DID_MULTIPLEGT: Stata module to estimate sharp Difference-in-Difference designs with multiple groups and periods," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03946768, HAL.
    10. Grier, Kevin B. & Grier, Robin M., 2021. "The Washington consensus works: Causal effects of reform, 1970-2015," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 59-72.
    11. John Bradbury & Joseph Johnson, 2006. "Do supermajority rules limit or enhance majority tyranny? evidence from the US States, 1960–1997," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 429-441, June.
    12. Jac C. Heckelman & Keith L. Dougherty, 2010. "Majority Rule versus Supermajority Rules: Their Effects on Narrow and Broad Taxes," Public Finance Review, , vol. 38(6), pages 738-761, November.
    13. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2006. "Large Sample Properties of Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 235-267, January.
    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. Dongwon Lee, 2016. "Supermajority rule and bicameral bargaining," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 53-75, October.
    2. Roth, Jonathan & Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Bilinski, Alyssa & Poe, John, 2023. "What’s trending in difference-in-differences? A synthesis of the recent econometrics literature," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 2218-2244.
    3. Mahajan, Aseem & Pongou, Roland & Tondji, Jean-Baptiste, 2023. "Supermajority politics: Equilibrium range, policy diversity, utilitarian welfare, and political compromise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 963-974.
    4. Dongwon Lee, 2015. "Supermajority rule and the law of 1/n," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 251-274, September.
    5. Paul Pecorino, 2018. "Supermajority rule, the law of 1/n, and government spending: a synthesis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 19-36, April.
    6. Dongwon Lee & Thomas E. Borcherding & Youngho Kang, 2014. "Public Spending and the Paradox of Supermajority Rule," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(3), pages 614-632, January.
    7. Björn Kauder & Niklas Potrafke, 2016. "Supermajorities and Political Rent Extraction," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(1), pages 65-81, February.
    8. Cordonnier, Victor & Covarrubias, Katia Alejandra & de la O Campos, Ana Paula, 2024. "The impacts of widespread agricultural interventions on yields and food security in Ethiopia☆," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    9. Poignant, Adrian, 2023. "Small-scale mining and agriculture: Evidence from northwestern Tanzania," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    10. George R. Crowley, 2019. "The Law of 1/n Revisited: Distributive Politics, Legislature Size, and the Costs of Collective Action," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 667-690, October.
    11. Christian Bjørnskov & Niklas Potrafke, 2012. "Political Ideology and Economic Freedom Across Canadian Provinces," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 143-166.
    12. Antonio Acconcia & Elisa Scarinzi, 2022. "The Effects of Local Demand and Supply Restrictions on Markup," CSEF Working Papers 635, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy, revised 17 Mar 2022.
    13. Doyle, Mary-Alice & Schurer, Stefanie & Silburn, Sven, 2022. "Unintended consequences of welfare reform: Evidence from birthweight of Aboriginal children in Australia," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    14. Aaron Richterman & Harsha Thirumurthy, 2022. "The effects of cash transfer programmes on HIV-related outcomes in 42 countries from 1996 to 2019," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(10), pages 1362-1371, October.
    15. Dmitry Arkhangelsky & Guido Imbens, 2023. "Causal Models for Longitudinal and Panel Data: A Survey," Papers 2311.15458, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    16. Cansu Oymak & Jean-François Maystadt, 2023. "Can refugees improve native children’s health?: Evidence from Turkey," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2023017, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    17. John Bradbury & Joseph Johnson, 2006. "Do supermajority rules limit or enhance majority tyranny? evidence from the US States, 1960–1997," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 429-441, June.
    18. Cravo, Tulio A. & de Andrade Jacinto, Paulo & Quintana, Rodrigo, 2024. "Can work sharing sustain employment during economic downturn? Evidence from Brazil," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    19. Freedman, Matthew & Khanna, Shantanu & Neumark, David, 2023. "Combining rules and discretion in economic development policy: Evidence on the impacts of the California Competes Tax Credit," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    20. Clément de Chaisemartin & Xavier D’Haultfœuille, 2023. "Two-way fixed effects and differences-in-differences with heterogeneous treatment effects: a survey," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 26(3), pages 1-30.

    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:88:y:2022:i:4:p:1599-1625. 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.