The literature on distributive politics reveals that presidents regularly influence federal spending and disproportionately direct federal grants toward their core supporters. This paper offers a comprehensive assessment of the interpretation of core-supporter targeting. Empirical evidence shows that the underlying patterns of partisan targeting do not accord with standard accounts of party-building activities nor electoral considerations that are evidence of presidential particularism. Instead, this paper argues that presidential policy priority better explains core-state targeting. Presidents use agencies that are ideologically aligned with them or associated with their policy priorities to enhance the largesse they bestow on core constituencies, and this is the consequence of presidents pursuing ideological and policy goals. Collectively, it indicates a less cynical point of view on the orientation of the American presidency.
AlexanderDanBerryChristopher R.HowellWilliam G.. 2016. “Distributive Politics and Legislator Ideology.” The Journal of Politics78 (1): 214–31.
2.
AndersonSarah E.WoonJonathan. 2014. “Delaying the Buck: Timing and Strategic Advantages in Executive-Legislative Bargaining over Appropriations.” Congress & the Presidency41: 25–48.
3.
BawnKathleenCohenMartinKarolDavidMasketSethNoelHansZallerJohn. 2012. “A Theory of Political Parties: Groups, Policy Demands and Nominations in American Politics.” Perspectives on Politics10 (3): 571–97.
4.
BerryChristopher R.BurdenBarry C.HowellWilliam G.. 2010. “The President and the Distribution of Federal Spending.” American Political Science Review104 (4): 783–99.
5.
BerryChristopher R.GersenJacob E.. 2017. “Agency Design and Political Control.” The Yale Law Journal126 (4): 1002–49.
6.
BertelliAnthony M.GroseChristian R.. 2009. “Secretaries of Pork? A New Theory of Distributive Public Policy.” The Journal of Politics71 (3): 926–45.
7.
CameronCharles M.2000. Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Canes-WroneBrandiceHowellWilliam G.LewisDavid E.. 2008. “Toward a Broader Understanding of Presidential Power: A Reevaluation of the Two Presidencies Thesis.” The Journal of Politics70 (1): 1–16.
10.
ChenJowei. 2013. “Voter Partisanship and the Effect of Distributive Spending on Political Participation.” American Journal of Political Science57 (1): 200–17.
11.
CoxGary W.2006. “Swing Voters, Core Voters, and Distributive Politics.” In Political Representation, edited by. ShapiroIanStokesSusan C.WoodElisabeth JeanKirshnerAlexander S., 342–57. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
CoxGary W.McCubbinsMathew D.. 1986. “Electoral Politics as a Redistributive Game.” The Journal of Politics48 (2): 370–89.
13.
DixitAvinashLongreganJohn. 1996. “The Determinants of Success of Special Interests in Redistributive Politics.” The Journal of Politics58 (4): 1132–55.
14.
DownsAnthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York, NY: Harper.
15.
DynesAdam M.HuberGregory A.. 2015. “Partisanship and the Allocation of Federal Spending: Do Same-Party Legislators or Voters Benefit from Shared Party Affiliation with the President and House Majority?” American Political Science Review109 (1): 172–86.
16.
FennoRichard F. 1978. Home style: House Members in their districts. Boston, MA:Little, Brown.
17.
FitzpatrickJohn C. 1931. The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources, 1745-1799. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
18.
FouirnaiesAlexanderMutlu-ErenHande. 2015. “English Bacon: Copartisan Bias in Intergovernmental Grant Allocation in England.” The Journal of Politics77 (3): 802–17.
19.
FrohlichNormanOppenheimerJoe. 1984. “Post-election Redistributive Strategies of Representatives: A Partial Theory of the Politics of Redistribution.” Public Choice42 (2): 113–31.
20.
FrymerPaulSkrentnyJohn David. 1998. “Coalition-Building and the Politics of Electoral Capture during the Nixon Administration: African Americans, Labor, Latinos.” Studies in American Political Development12 (1): 131–61.
21.
GalvinDaniel J.2010. Presidential Party Building: Dwight D. Eisenhower to George W. Bush. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
GimpelJames G.LeeFrances E.ThorpeRebecca U.. 2012. “Geographic Distribution of the Federal Stimulus of 2009.” Political Science Quarterly127 (4): 567–95.
23.
HainmuellerJensMummoloJonathanXuYiqing. 2019. “How Much Should We Trust Estimates from Multiplicative Interaction Models? Simple Tools to Improve Empirical Practice.” Political Analysis27 (2): 163–92.
24.
HowellWilliam G.2003. Power without Persuasion: The Politics of Direct Presidential Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25.
HowellWilliam G.Magazinnik.Asya2017. “Presidential Prescriptions for State Policy: Obama’s Race to the Top Initiative.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management36 (3): 502–31.
26.
HowellWilliamMoeTerry. 2016. Relic: How Our Constitution Undermines Effective Government and Why We Need a More Powerful Presidency. New York, NY: Basic Book.
27.
HudakJohn. 2014. Presidential Pork: White House Influence over the Distribution of Federal Grants. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
28.
JamesScott C. 2000. Presidents, Parties, and the State. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
29.
KaganElena. 2001. “Presidential Administration.” Harvard Law Review114: 2245–385.
30.
KrauseGeorge A.O’ConnellAnne Joseph. 2016. “Experiential Learning and Presidential Management of the U.S. Federal Bureaucracy: Logic and Evidence from Agency Leadership Appointments.” American Journal of Political Science60 (4): 913–31.
31.
KrauseGeorge A.MeierKenneth J.. 2003. Politics, Policy, and Organizations: Frontiers in the Scientific Study of Bureaucracy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
32.
KrinerDouglas L.Reeves.Andrew2012. “The Influence of Federal Spending on Presidential Elections.” American Political Science Review106 (4): 914–31.
33.
KrinerDouglas L.Reeves.Andrew2015. “Presidential Particularism and Divided-the-Dollar Politics.” American Political Science Review106 (2): 348–66.
34.
LarcineseValentinoRizzoLeonzioTestaCecilia. 2006. “Allocating the U.S. Federal Budget to the States: The Impact of the President.” The Journal of Politics68 (2): 447–56.
35.
LeeFrances E.2016. Insecure Majorities: Congress and the Perpetual Campaign. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
36.
LevittSteven D.Snyder.James M.1995. “Political Parties and the Distribution of Federal Outlays.” American Journal of Political Science39 (4): 958–80.
37.
LewisDavid.2008. The Politics of Presidential Appointments: Political Control and Bureaucratic Performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
LewisDavidMoeTerry. 2009. “The Presidency and the Bureaucracy: The Levers of Presidential Control.” In The Presidency and the Political System, edited by. NelsonMichael. 9 ed., 367–400. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
39.
LindbeckAssarWeibullJörgen W.. 1987. “Balanced Budget Redistribution and the Outcome of Political Competition.” Public Choice52: 273–97.
40.
LowandeKenneth S.JenkinsJeffery A.ClarkeAndrew J.. 2018. “Presidential Particularism and US Trade Politics.” Political Science Research and Methods6 (2): 265–81.
41.
MayhewDavid R.1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
42.
McCartyNolan M. 2000. “Presidential Pork: Executive Veto Power and Distributive Politics.” American Political Science Review94 (1): 117–29.
43.
MilkisSidney M.RhodesJesse H.CharnockEmily J.. 2012. “What Happened to Post Partisanship? Barack Obama and the New American Party System.” Perspectives on Politics10 (1): 57–76.
44.
MoeTerry M.WilsonScott A.. 1994. “Presidents and the Politics of Structure.” Law and Contemporary Problems57 (2): 1–44.
45.
NapolioNicholas G. 2021. “Implementing Presidential Particularism: Bureaucracy and the Distribution of Federal Grants.” Political Science Research and Methods, 1–11.
46.
ReevesAndrew. 2011. “Political Disaster: Unilateral Powers, Electoral Incentives, and Presidential Disaster Declarations.” The Journal of Politics73(4):1142–51.
StratmannThomasWojnilowerJoshua. 2015. “Presidential Particularism: Distributing Funds between Alternative Objectives and Strategies.” Working Paper.
49.
WildavskyAaron. 1996. “The Two Presidencies.” Trans-Action4 (2): 7–14.
50.
WilsonWoodrow. 1908. Constitutional Government in the United States. New York, NY: The Columbia University Press.
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.
