Although there are strong theoretical arguments about both the benefits and costs of decentralization in the federalism literature, there is little on how second-order fiscal decentralization effects the financial health of state governments. This study examines this question and adds to the understanding of state-and-local fiscal relations. Using financial indicators that measure several dimensions of financial condition, the research estimates the effect of revenue and expenditure decentralization on state fiscal health. It finds that while state financial condition is unaffected by revenue decentralization, there is a curvilinear relationship between expenditure decentralization and long-term state financial condition.
AkaiNobuoSakataMasayo. 2002. Fiscal decentralization contributes to economic growth: Evidence from state-level cross-section data for the United States. Journal of Urban Economics52:93–108.
2.
BaickerKatherineGordonNora. 2006. The effect of state education finance reform on total local resources. Journal of Public Economics90:1519–35.
3.
BermanDavid R.2003. Local governments and the states. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
4.
BerryWilliam D.FordingRichard C.RingquistEvan J.HansonRussell L.KlarnerCarl E.. 2010. Measuring citizen and government ideology in the US states: A re-appraisal. State Politics & Policy Quarterly10:117–35.
5.
BerryWilliam D.RingquistEvan J.FordingRichard C.HansonRussell L.. 1998. Measuring citizen and government ideology in the American states, 1960-93. American Journal of Political Science42:327–48.
6.
BowmanAnn O’M.KearneyRichard C.. 2011. Second-order devolution: Data and doubt. Publius: The Journal of Federalism41:563–85.
7.
BrunoriDavid. 2007. Local tax policy: A federalist perspective, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
8.
ClarkBenjamin Y.2015. Evaluating the validity and reliability of the financial condition index for local governments. Public Budgeting & Finance35:66–88.
De HoyosRafael E.SarafidisVasilis. 2006. Testing for cross-sectional dependence in panel-data models. Stata Journal6 (4): 482.
11.
FisherRonald C.2003. The changing state-local fiscal environment: A 25 year retrospective. In State and local finances under pressure, ed. SjoquistDavid L., 9–29. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
GamkharShamaMitchell PickerillJ.. 2012. The state of American federalism 2011–2012: A fend for yourself and activist form of bottom-up federalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism42:357–86.
14.
GloverDonald R.SimonJulian L.. 1975. The effect of population density on infrastructure: The case of road building. Economic Development and Cultural Change23:453–68.
15.
GoelzhauserGregRoseShanna. 2017. The state of American federalism 2016–2017: Policy reversals and partisan perspectives on intergovernmental relations. Publius: The Journal of Federalism47:285–313.
16.
GoodspeedTimothy J.2002. Bailouts in a federation. International Tax and Public Finance9:409–21.
17.
GorinaEvgeniaMaherCraigJoffeMarc. 2018. Local fiscal distress: Measurement and prediction. Public Budgeting & Finance38:72–94.
18.
Government Accounting Standards Board. 1999. Statement no. 34 of the Government Accounting Standards Board, basic financial statements—And management’s discussion and analysis. Norwalk: CT.
19.
GradsteinMarkKaganovichMichael. 2004. Aging population and education finance. Journal of Public Economics88:2469–85.
20.
GreerRobert A.DenisonDwight V.. 2016. Determinants of debt concentration at the state level. Public Budgeting & Finance36 (4): 111–30.
21.
HoechleDaniel. 2007. Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence. Stata Journal7 (3): 281.
22.
JimenezBenedict Salazar. 2009. Fiscal stress and the allocation of expenditure responsibilities between state and local governments: An exploratory study. State and Local Government Review41:81–94.
23.
JohnsonCraig L.KiokoSharon N.Bartley HildrethW.. 2012. Government-wide financial statements and credit risk. Public Budgeting & Finance32:80–104.
24.
KimByungkyuFordingRichard C.. 2010. Second-order devolution and the implementation of TANF in the US States. State Politics & Policy Quarterly10:341–67.
25.
KlohaPhilipWeissertCarol S.KleineRobert. 2005. Developing and testing a composite model to predict local fiscal distress. Public Administration Review65:313–23.
26.
KornaiJanosMaskinEricRolandGéard. 2003. Understanding the soft budget constraint. Journal of Economic Literature41:1095–136.
27.
McLureCharles E.1967. The interstate exporting of state and local taxes: Estimates for 1962. National Tax Journal20:49–77.
28.
MusgraveRichard. A.1959. The theory of public finance. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
29.
MusgraveRichard A., ed. 1965. Essays in fiscal federalism. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
30.
NohriaNitinGulatiRanjay. 1996. Is slack good or bad for innovation?Academy of Management Journal39:1245–64.
31.
NohriaNitinGulatiRanjay. 1997. What is the optimum amount of organizational slack? A study of the relationship between slack and innovation in multinational firms. European Management Journal15:603–11.
32.
OatesWallace E. 1972. Fiscal federalism. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
33.
OatesWallace E. 1977. The political economy of fiscal federalism. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
34.
OatesWallace E., ed. 1991. Studies in fiscal federalism. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar.
35.
OatesWallace E.1999. An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature37:1120–49.
36.
OatesWallace E.2008. On the evolution of fiscal federalism: Theory and institutions. National Tax Journal61:313–34.
37.
OlsonMancur. 1969. The principle of fiscal equivalence: The division of responsibilities among different levels of government. The American Economic Review:479–87.
38.
OstromElinor. 1976. Size and performance in a federal system. Publius6:33–73.
39.
OstromVincentBishRobertOstromElinor. 1988. Local government in the United States. San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.
40.
OstromVincentTieboutCharles M.WarrenRobert. 1961. The organization of government in metropolitan areas: A theoretical inquiry. American Political Science Review55:831–42.
41.
QianYingyiRolandGerard. 1998. Federalism and the soft budget constraint. American Economic Review:1143–62.
42.
ReschovskyAndrew. 2004. The impact of state government fiscal crises on local governments and schools. State and Local Government Review36:86–102.
43.
RivenbarkWilliam C.RoenigkDale J.AllisonGregory S.. 2010. Conceptualizing financial condition in local government. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management22:149–77.
44.
RossJustinYanWenliJohnsonCraig. 2015. The public financing of America’s largest cities: A study of city financial records in the wake of the Great Recession. Journal of Regional Science55:113–38.
45.
SaxtonGregory D.HoeneChristopher W.ErieSteven P.. 2002. Fiscal constraints and the loss of home rule: The long-term impacts of California’s post-proposition 13 fiscal regime. The American Review of Public Administration32 (4): 423–54.
46.
ShapiroThomasMeschedeTatjanaOsoroSam. 2013, 2. The roots of the widening racial wealth gap: Explaining the black-white economic divide. Research and Policy Brief. Waltham, MA: Institute on Assets & Social Policy.
47.
SinglaAkheilComeauxJamesKirschnerCharlotte L.. 2014. Blind, broke, and bedlam: Differentiating fiscal stress from bankruptcy in California. Public Finance and Management14:306.
48.
SinglaAkheilStritchJustinFeeneyMary K.. forthcoming. Constrained or creative? Changes in financial condition and entrepreneurial orientation in public organizations. Public Administration.
49.
StoneSamuel B.2015. The effect of fiscal decentralization on the financial condition of municipal Government. International Journal of Public Administration38:453–60.
50.
StoneSamuel B.SinglaAkheilComeauxJamesKirschnerCharlotte. 2015. A comparison of financial indicators: The case of Detroit. Public Budgeting & Finance35:90–111.
51.
StephensG. Ross. 1974. State centralization and the erosion of local autonomy. The Journal of Politics36:44–76.
52.
TanJustin. 2003. Curvilinear relationship between organizational slack and firm performance: Evidence from Chinese state enterprises. European Management Journal21:740–49.
53.
WallisJohn JosephOatesWallace E.. 1988. Decentralization in the public sector: An empirical study of state and local government. In Fiscal federalism: Quantitative studies, ed. RosenHarvey S. , 5–32. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
54.
WangXiaohuDennisLyndaTuYuan Sen. 2007. Measuring financial condition: A study of US states. Public Budgeting & Finance2:1–21.
55.
WeingastBarry R.2009. Second generation fiscal federalism: The implications of fiscal incentives. Journal of Urban Economics65:279–93.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
