Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Geographic Politics in the U.S. House of Representatives: Coalition Building and Distribution of Benefits

Geographic Politics in the U.S. House of Representatives: Coalition Building and Distribution of... This article argues that scholars need to consider the structure of House representation to better understand distributive politics. Because House districts (unlike states) are not administrative units in the federal system, House members cannot effectively claim credit for most grant‐in‐aid funds. Instead, their best credit‐claiming opportunities lie in earmarked projects, a small fraction of federal grant dollars. As a consequence, I expect to find: (1) political factors have a much greater effect on the distribution of earmarked projects than on federal funds generally; and (2) project grants are a better support‐building tool for coalition leaders than allocations to states. I test this argument with a study of the 1998 reauthorization of surface transportation programs and find strong support for both hypotheses. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Political Science Wiley

Geographic Politics in the U.S. House of Representatives: Coalition Building and Distribution of Benefits

American Journal of Political Science , Volume 47 (4) – Oct 1, 2003

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/geographic-politics-in-the-u-s-house-of-representatives-coalition-Ur7bDmJHWQ

References (30)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0092-5853
eISSN
1540-5907
DOI
10.1111/1540-5907.00050
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article argues that scholars need to consider the structure of House representation to better understand distributive politics. Because House districts (unlike states) are not administrative units in the federal system, House members cannot effectively claim credit for most grant‐in‐aid funds. Instead, their best credit‐claiming opportunities lie in earmarked projects, a small fraction of federal grant dollars. As a consequence, I expect to find: (1) political factors have a much greater effect on the distribution of earmarked projects than on federal funds generally; and (2) project grants are a better support‐building tool for coalition leaders than allocations to states. I test this argument with a study of the 1998 reauthorization of surface transportation programs and find strong support for both hypotheses.

Journal

American Journal of Political ScienceWiley

Published: Oct 1, 2003

There are no references for this article.