Incorporating race into tactical spending for electoral gain, this article revisits the relative effects of vote production and vote retention on distributive politics. It investigates whether a “compassion strategy” to influence the electoral behavior of voters while being responsive to need-based social welfare demands affected federal discretionary grants to faith-based organizations (FBOs) during the administration of George W. Bush. The findings suggest that federal domestic social welfare funding of FBOs may have involved a combination of the tactical use of grants for both electoral purposes (i.e., vote production and vote retention) and the reduction of need among the states.
AberbachJoel D.2005. The political significance of the George W. Bush administration. Social Policy & Administration39:130–49.
2.
AntonThomasCawleyJerryKramerKevin. 1980. Moving money: An empirical analysis of federal expenditure patterns. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
3.
ArnoldDouglas R.1981. Legislators, bureaucrats, and locational decisions. Public Choice37:107–32.
4.
BeckNathanielKatzJonathan. 1995. What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-sectional data. American Political Science Review89:634–47.
5.
BerganDaniel E.GerberAlan S.GreenDonald P.PanagopoulosCostas. 2005. Grassroots mobilization and voter turnout in 2004. Public Opinion Quarterly69:760–77.
6.
BertelliAnthony M.GroseChristian R.2009. Secretaries of pork? A new theory of distributive public policy. Journal of Politics71:926–45.
7.
BickersKennethSteinRobert. 1996. The electoral dynamics of the federal pork barrel. American Journal of Political Science40:1300–1326.
8.
BlackAmyKoopmanDouglasRydenDavid. 2004. Of little faith: The politics of George W. Bush’s faith-based initiative. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
9.
BushGeorge W.2000. Foreword. In Marvin Olasky, Compassionate conservatism: What it is, what it does, and how it can help America, xi–xii. New York: Free Press.
10.
BushGeorge W.2001. Rallying the armies of compassion. Washington, DC: White House.
11.
CampbellDavid. 2006. Religious “threat” in contemporary presidential elections. Journal of Politics68:104–15.
12.
ChavesMark. 2004. Congregations in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
ChavesMarkAndersonShawna. 2008. National Congregations Study: Cumulative data file and codebook. Durham, NC: Duke University, Department of Sociology.
14.
ChoiChiTurnerCharles C.VoldenCraig. 2002. Means, motives, and opportunity: Politics, community needs, and community oriented policing services grants. American Politics Research30:423–55.
15.
Cohen–MarksMaraNuñoStephen A.SanchezGabriel. 2009. Look back in anger: Voter opinions of Mexican immigrants in the aftermath of the 2006 immigration demonstrations. Urban Affairs Review44:695–717.
16.
CoxGary. 2010. Swing voters, core voters, and distributive politics. In Political representation, ed. ShapiroIanWoodElisabeth JeanKirshnerAlexander, 342–57. New York: Cambridge University Press.
17.
CoxGaryMcCubbinsMatthew. 1986. Electoral politics as a redistributive game. Journal of Politics48:370–89.
18.
DahlbergMatzJohanssonEva. 2002. On the vote-purchasing behavior of incumbent governments. American Political Science Review96:27–40.
19.
DiIulioJohn. 2007. Godly republic: A centrist blueprint for America’s faith-based future. Berkeley: University of California Press.
20.
DixitAvinashLondreganJohn. 1996. The determinants of success of special interests in redistributive politics. Journal of Politics58:1132–55.
21.
EdsallThomas B.2006. Grants flow to Bush allies on social issues: Federal programs direct at least $157 million. Washington Post, March22, A1.
22.
EspinosaGaston. 2008. Latinos, religion, and the American presidency. In Religion, race, and the American presidency, ed. EspinosaGaston, 231–74. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
23.
FarrisAnneNathanRichard P.WrightDavid J.2004. The expanding administrative presidency: George W. Bush and the faith-based initiative. Albany, NY: Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy.
24.
FormicolaJo ReneeSegersMary. 2003. The ugly politics of the faith-based initiative. In Faith-based initiatives and the Bush administration: The good, the bad, and the ugly, by FormicolaJo ReneeSegersMaryWeberPaul, 115–60. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
25.
FormicolaJo ReneeSegersMaryWeberPaul, eds. 2003. Faith-based initiatives and the Bush administration: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
26.
FragaLuis RicardoLealDavid L.2004. Playing the “Latino card”: Race, ethnicity, and national party politics. Du Bois Review1:297–317.
27.
FromAlLynchVictoria. 2008. Who are the swing voters? Key groups that decide national elections. Washington, DC: Democratic Leadership Council.
28.
FrymerPaul. 1999. Uneasy alliances: Race and party competition in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
GamkharShama. 2002. Federal intergovernmental grants and the states: Managing devolution. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
30.
GamkharShamaAliHamid. 2007. Political economy of grant allocations: The case of the federal highway demonstration grants. Publius38:1–21.
31.
GersonMichael J.2007. Heroic conservatism: Why Republicans need to embrace America’s ideals (and why they deserve to fail if they don’t). New York: HarperCollins.
32.
GilensMartin. 1999. Why Americans hate welfare: Race, media, and the politics of antipoverty policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33.
GimpelJames G.KaufmannKaren M.Pearson-MerkowitzShanna. 2007. Battleground states versus blackout states: The behavioral implications of modern presidential campaigns. Journal of Politics69:786–97.
34.
GrossmanPhilip J.1994. A political theory of intergovernmental grants. Public Choice78:295–303.
HuberGregoryArceneauxKevin. 2007. Identifying the persuasive effects of presidential advertising. American Journal of Political Science51:961–81.
37.
HurwitzJonPeffleyMark. 2005. Playing the race card in the post–Willie Horton era: The impact of racialized code words on support for punitive crime policy. Public Opinion Quarterly69:99–112.
38.
HutchingsVincent L.ValentinoNicholas A.PhilpotTashaWhiteIsmail K.2004. The compassion strategy: Race and the gender gap in American politics. Public Opinion Quarterly68:512–41.
39.
JohanssonEva. 2003. Intergovernmental grants as a tactical instrument: Empirical evidence from Swedish municipalities. Journal of Public Economics87:883–915.
40.
JonesDale E.DotySherriGrammichCliffordHorschJames E.HousealRichardLynnMacMarcumJohn P.SanchagrinKenneth M.TaylorRichard H.2003. Religious congregations & membership in the United States 2000: An enumeration by region, state, and county based on data reported for 149 religious bodies. Cincinnati, OH: Glenmary Research Center.
41.
KhemaniStuti. 2003. Partisan politics and intergovernmental transfers in India. Washington, DC: Development Research Group, World Bank.
42.
KuoDavid. 2006. Tempting faith: An inside story of political seduction. New York: Free Press.
43.
LangerGaryCohenJon. 2005. Voters and values in the 2004 election. Public Opinion Quarterly69:744–59.
44.
LarcineseValentinoRizzoLeonzioTestaCecilia. 2006. Allocating the US federal budget to the states: The impact of the president. Journal of Politics68:447–56.
45.
LeegeDavid C.2008. Catholics and the American presidency. In Religion, race, and the American presidency, ed. EspinosaGaston, 55–80. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
46.
LindbeckAssarWeibullJorgen W.1993. A model of political equilibrium in a representative democracy. Journal of Public Economics51:195–209.
47.
LowryRobert C.PotoskiMatthew. 2004. Organized interests and the politics of federal discretionary grants. Journal of Politics66:513–33.
48.
MayerWilliam G., ed. 2008. The swing voter in American politics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
49.
McCartyNolan M.2000. Presidential pork: Executive veto power and distributive politics. American Political Science Review94:117–29.
50.
McClainPaula D.CarterNiambi B.DeFrancesco SotoVictoria M.LyleMonique L.GrynaviskiJeffrey D.NunnallyShayla C.ScottoThomas J.KendrickJ. AlanLackeyGerald F.CottonKendra Davenport. 2006. Racial distancing in a southern city: Latino immigrants’ views of black Americans. Journal of Politics68:571–84.
51.
McDanielEric L.EllisonChristopher G.2008. God’s party? Race, religion, and partisanship over time. Political Research Quarterly61:180–91.
52.
McVeighRoryDiazMaria-Elena D.2009. Voting to ban same-sex marriage: Interests, values, and communities. American Sociological Review74:891–915.
53.
MendelbergTali. 2001. The race card: Campaign strategy, implicit messages, and the norm of equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54.
MoeTerry. 1985. The politicized presidency. In The new direction in American politics, ed. ChubbJohnPetersonPaul, 235-72. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
55.
MontielLisa M.WrightDavid J.2006. Getting a piece of the pie: Federal grants to faith-based social service organizations. Albany: State University of New York, Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy.
56.
NathanRichard. 1983. The plot that failed Nixon and the administrative presidency. New York: John Wiley.
57.
National Archives and Records Administration. 2001. Federal Register66 (January31): 8499–8500.
58.
New York Times. 2000. “The 2000 campaign; in his own words: George W. Bush.” The New York Times, July11, A22.
59.
OlaskyMarvin. 2000. Compassionate conservatism: What it is, what it does, and how it can help America. New York: Free Press.
60.
OwensMichael Leo. 2006. Which congregations will take advantage of charitable choice? Explaining the pursuit of public funding by congregations. Social Science Quarterly87:55–75.
61.
OwensMichael Leo. 2007. God and government in the ghetto: The politics of church–state collaboration in black America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
62.
Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 2001. Faith-based funding backed, but church–state doubts abound. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.
63.
Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 2006. No consensus on immigration problem or proposed fixes: America’s immigration quandary. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.
64.
PhilpotTasha S.2007. Race, republicans, and the return of the party of Lincoln. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
65.
PrendergastWilliam B.1999. The Catholic voter in American politics: The passing of the Democratic monolith. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
66.
RaganMark. 2004. Faith-based vs. secular: Using administrative data to compare the performance of faith-affiliated and other social services providers. Albany: State University of New York, Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy.
67.
RamakrishnanKarthickWongTom (Tak). 2010. Partisanship, not Spanish: Explaining municipal ordinances affecting undocumented immigrants. In Taking local control: Immigration policy activism in U.S. cities and states, ed. VarsanyiMonica, 73-96. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
68.
RichMichael J.1989. Distributed politics and the allocation of federal grants. American Political Science Review83:193–213.
69.
Roberts-DeGennaroMaria. 2007. Executive orders for the faith-based and community initiatives. Journal of Policy Practice5:55–68.
70.
RuleSheila. 1981. At Urban League, Mondale derides Reagan values. New York Times, July23, 17.
71.
SagerRebecca. 2010. Faith, politics, and power: The politics of faith-based initiatives. New York: Oxford University Press.
72.
SchallerLyle E.1967. The churches’ war on poverty. Nashville, TN: Abingdon.
73.
SchneiderAnneIngramHelen. 1993. Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review87:334–47.
74.
ShawDaron R.2006. The race to 270: The Electoral College and the campaign strategies of 2000 and 2004. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
75.
ShepsleA. KennethWeingastR. Barry. 1981. Political preferences for the pork barrel: A generalization. American Journal of Political Science25:96–111.
76.
SiderRonald J.UnruhHeidi Rolland. 2004. Typology of religious characteristics of social service and educational organizations and programs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly33:109–34.
77.
SmidtCorwin. 2008. Evangelicals and the American presidency. In Religion, race, and the American presidency, ed. EspinosaGaston, 1–26. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
78.
SmithSteven RathgebSossinM. R.2001. The varieties of faith-related agencies. Public Administration Review61:651–70.
79.
SteinRobert M.BickersKenneth. 1995. Perpetuating the pork barrel: Policy subsystems and American democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
80.
StoutDavid. 2006. HUD chief’s remarks aside, study finds no favoritism. The New York Times, September22, A16.
81.
StrebMatthew J.2001. A new message: Compassionate conservatism, African Americans, and the Republican Party. Politics & Policy29:670–91.
82.
US Bureau of the Census. 2002–8. Federal aid to the states. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
83.
VoldenCraig. 2007. Intergovernmental grants: A formal model of interrelated national and subnational political decisions. Publius37:209–43.
84.
WallaceSheriLewisAngela K.2007. Compassionate conservatism and African Americans: Politics puts faith to work and gains new allies?Journal of African American Studies10:75–93.
85.
WatermanRichard. 2009. The administrative presidency, unilateral power, and the unitary executive theory. Presidential Studies Quarterly39:5–9.
86.
WeingastBarry R.1994. Reflections on distributive politics and universalism. Political Research Quarterly47:319–27.
87.
WhiteIsmail. 2007. When race matters and when it doesn’t: Racial group differences in response to racial cues. American Political Science Association101:339–54.
88.
White House. 2001. Unlevel playing field: Barriers to participation by faith-based and community organizations in federal social service programs. Washington, DC: White House.
89.
White House. 2008a. The president’s faith based and community initiative in 50 states. Washington, DC: White House.
90.
White House. 2008b. The quiet revolution: The president’s faith-based and community initiative—A seven-year progress report. Washington, DC: White House.
91.
WilsonKatherine. 2008. The politics of Latino faith: Religion, identity, and urban community. New York: New York University Press.
92.
WineburgBob. 2007. Faith-based inefficiency: The follies of bush’s initiatives. New York: Praeger.
93.
WoodB. DanRichardW. Waterman. 1991. The dynamics of political control of the bureaucracy. American Political Science Review85:801–28.
94.
WoodwardKathleen. 2002. Calculating compassion. Indiana Law Review77:223–46.
95.
WorthingtonAndrew C.DolleryBrian E.1998. The political determination of intergovernmental grants in Austria.”Public Choice94:299-315.
96.
WuthnowRobert. 2004. Saving America? Faith-based services and the future of American civil society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
97.
ZornChristopher. 2001. Generalized estimating equation models for correlated data: A review with applications. American Journal of Political Science45:470–90.
Supplementary Material
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.
