党派之争与财产税再分配:废除科罗拉多州加拉格尔修正案的证据

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW Pub Date : 2023-05-22 DOI:10.1177/10911421231171760
Geoffrey Propheter
{"title":"党派之争与财产税再分配:废除科罗拉多州加拉格尔修正案的证据","authors":"Geoffrey Propheter","doi":"10.1177/10911421231171760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In November 2020, Colorado voters were asked to repeal the state's Gallagher Amendment, a constitutional redistributive policy in effect since 1983 that shifted the local property tax burden away from residential property on to nonresidential property. This study explores how partisanship predicts support for repealing Gallagher. Republican and Democrat platforms both entail sociotropic messages to support repeal, but following through on these political ideals carries a salient and nontrivial pocketbook cost to residential property owners. If voters aligned with one party or another are more likely to support repeal, it follows that these voters are more willing to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. Using election precinct voting data, I find that Democrat-leaning voters were more likely to support repeal than otherwise similar Republican-leaning voters.","PeriodicalId":46919,"journal":{"name":"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW","volume":"51 1","pages":"619 - 648"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Partisanship and Property Tax Redistribution: Evidence From Repealing Colorado's Gallagher Amendment\",\"authors\":\"Geoffrey Propheter\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10911421231171760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In November 2020, Colorado voters were asked to repeal the state's Gallagher Amendment, a constitutional redistributive policy in effect since 1983 that shifted the local property tax burden away from residential property on to nonresidential property. This study explores how partisanship predicts support for repealing Gallagher. Republican and Democrat platforms both entail sociotropic messages to support repeal, but following through on these political ideals carries a salient and nontrivial pocketbook cost to residential property owners. If voters aligned with one party or another are more likely to support repeal, it follows that these voters are more willing to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. Using election precinct voting data, I find that Democrat-leaning voters were more likely to support repeal than otherwise similar Republican-leaning voters.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"619 - 648\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10911421231171760\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10911421231171760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2020年11月,科罗拉多州选民被要求废除该州的加拉格尔修正案,这是一项自1983年起生效的宪法再分配政策,将当地财产税负担从住宅转移到非住宅。这项研究探讨了党派之争如何预测对废除加拉格尔的支持。共和党和民主党的纲领都包含了支持废除的反社会信息,但贯彻这些政治理想会给住宅业主带来显著而不平凡的钱包成本。如果与一个或另一个政党结盟的选民更有可能支持废除,那么可以说,这些选民更愿意把钱花在他们的嘴上。使用选区投票数据,我发现倾向民主党的选民比其他类似的倾向共和党的选民更有可能支持废除法案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Partisanship and Property Tax Redistribution: Evidence From Repealing Colorado's Gallagher Amendment
In November 2020, Colorado voters were asked to repeal the state's Gallagher Amendment, a constitutional redistributive policy in effect since 1983 that shifted the local property tax burden away from residential property on to nonresidential property. This study explores how partisanship predicts support for repealing Gallagher. Republican and Democrat platforms both entail sociotropic messages to support repeal, but following through on these political ideals carries a salient and nontrivial pocketbook cost to residential property owners. If voters aligned with one party or another are more likely to support repeal, it follows that these voters are more willing to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. Using election precinct voting data, I find that Democrat-leaning voters were more likely to support repeal than otherwise similar Republican-leaning voters.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Public Finance Review is a professional forum devoted to US policy-oriented economic research and theory, which focuses on a variety of allocation, distribution and stabilization functions within the public-sector economy. Economists, policy makers, political scientists, and researchers all rely on Public Finance Review, to bring them the most up-to-date information on the ever changing US public finance system, and to help them put policies and research into action. Public Finance Review not only presents rigorous empirical and theoretical papers on public economic policies, but also examines and critiques their impact and consequences. The journal analyzes the nature and function of evolving US governmental fiscal policies at the national, state and local levels.
期刊最新文献
A Double Negative: Capitalizing on Assessment Regressivity Fiscal Incidence of the Property Tax Does Smaller Government Mean Less Corruption? Can the Federal Budget Process Promote Fiscal Sustainability? Evidence from the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 Optimal Social Security with Loss Aversion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1