Residents of the United States rely on municipal governments to deliver important public goods but are often reluctant to pay for those goods. Can tax policy design affect voters’ propensity to say yes to local taxes? We answer this question by analyzing a new database of 929 tax increases of heterogeneous design that were proposed to California voters from 1996 to 2010. We find that voters’ willingness to raise a municipal tax varies with the choice of tax base, as well as with such policy design features as its timing and its symbolic links to particular purposes. The political limits on city revenue may vary substantially depending on how a tax is designed, and theories that assume otherwise—including several classic models of urban politics—may exaggerate the degree to which municipal revenues are constrained.
CampbellAndrea Louise. 2009. “What Americans Think of Taxes.” In The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective, edited by MartinIsaac WilliamMehrotraAjay K.PrasadMonica, 48–67. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
10.
ChamberlainGary. 1984. “Panel Data.” Handbook of Econometrics2:1247–318.
11.
ChettyRajLooneyAdamKroftKory. 2009. “Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence.” American Economic Review99 (4): 1145–77.
12.
ClarkTerry NicholsFergusonLorna Crowley. 1983. City Money: Political Processes, Fiscal Strain, and Retrenchment. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
13.
EinsteinKatherine LevineKoganVladimir. 2016. “Pushing the City Limits: Policy Responsiveness in Municipal Government.” Urban Affairs Review52 (1): 3–32.
14.
ElkinStephen L.1987. City and Regime in the American Republic. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press.
15.
ErieSteven P.KoganVladimirMacKenzieScott A.2011. Paradise Plundered: Fiscal Crisis and Governance Failures in San Diego. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.
16.
FairbrotherMalcolm. 2017. “When Will People Pay to Pollute? Environmental Taxes, Political Trust, and Experimental Evidence from Britain.” British Journal of Political Science. Published electronically April 6. doi:10.1017/S0007123416000727.
17.
FinkelsteinAmy. 2009. “E-ZTAX: Tax Salience and Tax Rates.” Quarterly Journal of Economics124 (3): 969–1010.
18.
FischelWilliam A.2001. The Homevoter Hypothesis: How Home Values Influence Local Government Taxation, School Finance, and Land-Use Policies. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.
19.
FortenMichael Javen. 2016. “Straight, No Chaser: Theory, History, and the Muting of the Urban State.” Urban Affairs Review52 (4): 591–621.
20.
FrugGerald E.1979. “The City as a Legal Concept.” Harvard Law Review93:1057–1154.
21.
FrugGerald E.BarronDavid J.2008. City Bound: How States Stifle Urban Innovation. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press.
22.
GlaserJames M.2002. “White Voters, Black Schools: Structuring Racial Choices with a Checklist Ballot.” American Journal of Political Science46:35–46.
23.
GoldinJacobHomonoffTatiana. 2013. “Smoke Gets in Your Eyes: Cigarette Tax Salience and Regressivity.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy5 (1): 302–36.
24.
HackerJacob S.PaulPierson. 2005. Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
25.
HamiltonBruce. 1975. “Zoning and Property Taxation in a System of Local Governments.” Urban Studies12 (1): 205–11.
26.
HarelOfer. 2009. “The Estimation of R2 and Adjusted R2 in Incomplete Data Sets Using Multiple Imputation.” Journal of Applied Statistics36 (10): 1109–18.
27.
HeckmanJames J.1979. “Sample Selection Bias as Specification Error.” Econometrica47:153–61.
28.
HopkinsDaniel J.2009. “The Diversity Discount: When Increasing Ethnic and Racial Diversity Prevents Tax Increases.” Journal of Politics71 (1): 160-77.
29.
HoxbyCarolineCabralMarika. 2012. “The Hated Property Tax: Salience, Tax Rates, and Tax Revolts.” NBER Working Paper No. 18514. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
30.
KatoJunko. 2003. Regressive Taxation and the Welfare State: Path Dependence and Policy Diffusion. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
31.
KidderJeffrey L.MartinIsaac William. 2012. “What We Talk About When We Talk About Taxes.” Symbolic Interaction35 (2): 123–45.
32.
KingdonJohn. 1995. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed.Boston: Addison-Wesley.
33.
LancasterTony. 2000. “The Incidental Parameter Problem Since 1948.” Journal of Econometrics95:391–413.
34.
LewisPaul G.NeimanMax. 2009. Custodians of Place: Governing the Growth and Development of Cities. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
35.
MartinIsaac William. 2010. “Redistributing to the Rich: Strategic Policy Crafting in the Campaign to Repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, 1938-1958.” American Journal of Sociology116 (1): 1–52.
36.
MartinIsaac WilliamLopezJane LillyOlsenLauren. 2017. “California Local Tax Ballot Measures.” UC Library Digital Collections. doi:10.6075/J09P2ZT7.
37.
MartinIsaac WilliamPrasadMonica. 2014. “Taxes and Fiscal Sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology40:331–45.
38.
McCafferyEdwardBaronJonathan. 2006. “Thinking About Tax.” Psychology, Public Policy and Law12 (1): 106–35.
39.
MeltsnerArnold J.1971. The Politics of City Revenue. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
40.
MillerJoanne M.KrosnickJon A.1998. “The Impact of Candidate Name Order on Election Outcomes.” Public Opinion Quarterly62 (3): 291–330.
41.
MolotchHarvey. 1976. “The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place.” American Journal of Sociology82 (2): 309–32.
42.
MorganKimberly J.CampbellAndrea Louise. 2005. “Financing the Welfare State: Elite Politics and the Decline of the Social Insurance Model in America.” Studies in American Political Development19:173–95.
43.
MundlakYari. 1978. “On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data.” Econometrica46 (1): 69–85.
44.
PatashnikEric. 2000. Putting Trust in the U.S. Budget: Federal Trust Funds and the Politics of Commitment. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
45.
PearsonElizabeth. 2014. “Saying Yes to Taxes: The Politics of Tax Reform Campaigns in Three Northwestern States, 1965-1973.” American Journal of Sociology119 (5): 1279–1323.
46.
PetersonPaul. 1981. City Limits. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press.
47.
PrasadMonica. 2005. “Why Is France so French? Culture, Institutions, and Neoliberalism, 1974-1981.” American Journal of Sociology111:357–407.
48.
PrasadMonica. 2006. The Politics of Free Markets: The Rise of Neoliberal Economic Policies in Britain, France, Germany, and the United States. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press.
49.
RivlinAlice. 1989. “The Continuing Search for a Popular Tax.” American Economics Review79 (2): 113–17.
50.
RomerThomasRosenthalHoward. 1978. “Political Resource Allocation, Controlled Agendas, and the Status Quo.” Public Choice33 (4): 27–43.
51.
RosenberrySara A.1982. “Social Insurance, Distributive Criteria and the Welfare Backlash: A Comparative Analysis.” British Journal of Political Science12 (4): 421–47.
52.
RuebenKim S.CerdánPedro. 2003. Fiscal Effects of Voter Approval Requirements on Local Governments. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California.
53.
SchomakerMichaelHeumannChristian. 2016. “Bootstrap Inference When Using Multiple Imputation.” arXiv Working Paper No. 1602.07933v3 [stat.ME], December5.
54.
SemykinaAnastasiaWooldridgeJeffrey M.2010. “Estimating Panel Data Models in the Presence of Endogeneity and Selection.” Journal of Econometrics157 (2): 375–80.
55.
StoneClarence. 1989. Regime Politics: Governing Atlanta, 1945-1988. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
56.
TausanovitchChrisWarshawChristopher. 2014. “Representation in Municipal Government.” American Political Science Review108 (3): 605–41.
57.
TieboutCharles M.1956. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.” Journal of Political Economy64 (5): 416–24.
58.
TrounstineJessica. 2009. “All Politics Is Local: The Reemergence of the Study of City Politics.” Perspectives on Politics7 (3): 611–18.
59.
TrounstineJessica. 2016. “Segregation and Inequality in Public Goods.” American Journal of Political Science60 (3): 709–25.
60.
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2015. “Table CA1: Personal Income Summary: Personal Income, Population, Per Capita Personal Income.” http://www.bea.gov/regional/index.htm.
61.
von HippelPaul T.2009. “How to Impute Interactions, Squares, and Other Transformed Variables.” Sociological Methodology39:265–91.
62.
WallstenKevin J.GenePark. 2015. “Confidence, Perception, and Politics in California: The Determinants of Attitudes Toward Taxes by Level of Government.” California Journal of Politics and Policy7 (2): 1–22.
63.
WeirMargaret. 1993. Politics and Jobs: The Boundaries of Employment Policy in the United States. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.
64.
WilenskyHarold L.2002. Rich Democracies: Political Economy, Public Policy, and Performance. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
65.
WilliamsonVanessa S.2017. Read My Lips: Why Americans Are Proud to Pay Taxes. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.
66.
WooldridgeJeffrey. 1995. “Selection Corrections for Panel Data Models under Conditional Mean Independence Assumptions.” Journal of Econometrics68 (1): 115–32.
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.
