Federal cutbacks and the fiscal condition of the states

Publius: The Journal of Federalism

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 141-158

  Wallin, Bruce A ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030161128     PISSN: 00485950     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a029860     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. 1 Aaron Wildavsky, "Doing Better and Feeling Worse: The Political Pathology of Health Policy," Speaking Truth to Power. The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis (Boston, MA: Little Brown, 1979).
2. 2 See, for example, Wallace Oates, Fiscal Federalism (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1972); George F. Break, Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations in the United States (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1967).
3. 2 See, for example, Wallace Oates, Fiscal Federalism (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1972); George F. Break, Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations in the United States (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1967).
4. 3 Daniel J. Elazar, "Federalism," David Sills, ed. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 5. (New York: MacMillan, 1968).
5. 4 John Connor, "Budget Outlook May Head States to Ease Taxes," Wall Street Journal, 28 April 1994, p. A2.
6. 5 Ronald K. Snell et. al., State Budget Actions (Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1995).
7. 6 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, October 1995 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1995).
8. 7 Ronald K. Snell, "State Fiscal Conditions in 1991," Legislative Finance Paper No. 76 (Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1991).
9. 8 "Where Did All the Money Go," Newsweek, 1 July 1991, pp. 21-28.
10. 9 Ibid, 26.
11. 10 Snell, "State Fiscal Conditions in 1991," p. 1: Marcia Howard, The Fiscal Survey of the States (Washington, D.C.: National Association of State Budget Officers, 1991), p. 9.
12. 11 Fiscal Affairs Staff, National Conference of State Legislatures, "State Fiscal Outlook for 1992," State Legislative Report 17 (January 1992).
13. 12 Ibid, 5.
14. 13 Ibid, 3.
15. 14 Steven D. Gold, ed. The Fiscal Crisis of the States (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1995), p. 18.
16. 15 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, October 1993 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1993), p. 33.
17. 16 Arturo Perez and Comna Fekl, State Fiscal Outlook for the National Conference of State Legislatures (Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1994).
18. 17 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, April 1994 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1994).
19. 18 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, November 1994 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1994), p. 11. This does not include Michigan's tax reform. For an alternative measurement, see Steven D. Gold and Elizabeth I. Davis, "Tax Cuts Slow Revenue Growth." State Revenue Reports 22 (November 1995): 6.
20. 18 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, November 1994 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1994), p. 11. This does not include Michigan's tax reform. For an alternative measurement, see Steven D. Gold and Elizabeth I. Davis, "Tax Cuts Slow Revenue Growth." State Revenue Reports 22 (November 1995): 6.
21. 19 Ibid., 3.
22. 20 Ibid., 14. NCSL determined the balance to be 5.1 percent in its State Budget Actions 1995 (Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1995), p. 9. Both include Alaska's outlying 68 percent to 73 percent balance.
23. 20 Ibid., 14. NCSL determined the balance to be 5.1 percent in its State Budget Actions 1995 (Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1995), p. 9. Both include Alaska's outlying 68 percent to 73 percent balance.
24. 21 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers. The Fiscal Survey of the States, October 1995 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1995), p. 11. This does not include Michigan. For an alternative accounting, see Gold and Davis, "Tax Cuts Slow Revenue Growth," 6.
25. 21 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers. The Fiscal Survey of the States, October 1995 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1995), p. 11. This does not include Michigan. For an alternative accounting, see Gold and Davis, "Tax Cuts Slow Revenue Growth," 6.
26. 22 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers. The Fiscal Survey of the States, November 1995 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1995), p. 3.
27. 23 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, October 1995 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1995), p. 14.
28. 24 Ibid., 16.
29. 25 Calculated from the National Governors' Association and the National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, various years (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1996). Appropriated expenditures were subtracted from appropriated revenues.
30. 26 Ibid.
31. 27 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, April 1996 (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1996), p. 3.
32. 28 These numbers are from preliminary estimates reported by thirty-four states State Budget and Tax Actions 1995: Preliminary Report (Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1995), p. 4.
33. 29 Gold, The Fiscal Crisis of the States, p. 10. Also, Stephen Moore, "Governors' Dilemma: Budgets Out of Control," Wall Street Journal, 31 January 1994, p. 1.
34. 29 Gold, The Fiscal Crisis of the States, p. 10. Also, Stephen Moore, "Governors' Dilemma: Budgets Out of Control," Wall Street Journal, 31 January 1994, p. 1.
35. 30 National Governors' Association and National Association of State Budget Officers, The Fiscal Survey of the States, various years (Washington, D.C.: NASBO, 1996).
36. 31 Donald J. Boyd and Elizabeth I. Davis, "Sales Tax Slowdown and Tax Cuts Reduce Revenue Growth," State Revenue Report No. 23 (Albany: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, 1996), p. 1.
37. 32 Ronald K. Snell, ed. Financing State Government in the 1990s (Washington, D.C.: National Conference of State Legislatures and National Governors' Association, 1993).
38. 33 Ibid.
39. 34 Ibid., 5.
40. 35 Ibid., 6.
41. 36 National Commission on State and Local Public Service, Hard Truths/Tough Choices: An Agenda for State and Local Government Reform (Albany: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, 1993). Dall Forsythe has argued that in tough fiscal times, states are unlikely to undertake significant reinvention reforms. See Dall Forsythe, "Financial Management and Reinvention of Government," Publu Productivity and Management Review 16 (December 1993): 415-423.
42. 36 National Commission on State and Local Public Service, Hard Truths/Tough Choices: An Agenda for State and Local Government Reform (Albany: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, 1993). Dall Forsythe has argued that in tough fiscal times, states are unlikely to undertake significant reinvention reforms. See Dall Forsythe, "Financial Management and Reinvention of Government," Publu Productivity and Management Review 16 (December 1993): 415-423.
43. 37 See, for example, Bruce A. Wallin, "Massachusetts: Downsizing State Government." Gold, ed., The Fiscal Crisis of the States, pp. 252-295.
44. 38 See Gold, The Fiscal Crisis of the States.
45. 39 Stacev Mazer, Restructuring and Innovations in State Management (Washington, D.C.: National Association of State Budget Officers, 1996).
46. 40 Gold, The Fiscal Crisis of the States, p. 378.
47. 41 Steven D. Gold, The State Fiscal Agenda for the 1990s (Denver, CO: The National Conference of State Legislatures, 1990).
48. 42 Bruce A. Wallin, "Economic, Political, and Fiscal Determinants of State Budget Deficits,n" (paper presented at the 1993 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., 2-4 September 1993).
49. 43 See, for example, Wallin, Massachusetts: Downsizing State Government, pp. 280-283.
50. 44 Steven D. Gold, The State Fiscal Agenda for the 1990s, pp. 30-31.
51. 45 Steven D. Gold "The State Fiscal Predicament Under the New Federalism," (draft paper prepared for the Economic Policy Institute, Washington, D.C.: 31 October 1995), p 18.
52. 46 "Highlights of Conference Report," Congressional Quarterly Weekly 18 (November 1995): 3513-3515.
53. 47 Ross C. DeVol, "State Impacts of the House and Senate Balanced Budget Resolutions," American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, "Can Massachusetts Afford the Way Congress Intends to Balance the Federal Budget?" (Washington, D.C.: AFSCME, 1995).
54. 48 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Federal Expenditures by State for Fiscal Year 1994 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995).
55. 49 DeVol, "State Impacts of the House and Senate Balanced Budget Resolutions."
56. 50 Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, "Tax Loss Mandates: The Impact of the House Passed 'Contract With America' Capital Gains & Depreciation Tax Changes on Tax Revenues in the States," American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, "Can Massachusetts Afford the Way Congress Intends to Balance the Federal Budget?" (Washington, D.C.: Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, 1995).
57. 51 Iris J. Lav and James R. St. George, "Can States Assume Federal Roles?," (paper presented at the annual conference of the National Tax Association, San Diego, CA, 10 October 1995).
58. 52 Gold, "The State Fiscal Predicament Under the New Federalism," p. 2.
59. 53 Ibid., 4.
60. 54 U.S. Bureau of the Census Federal Expenditures by State for Fiscal Year 1994 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1994), Table 8.
61. 55 U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Significant Features of Fiscal Federalism, vol. 2, (Washington, D.C.: ACIR, 1994), pp. 100-101. Table 75.
62. 56 John Holohan et al., Cutting Medicaid Spending in Response to Medicaid Caps (Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1995).
63. 57 Michigan Budget and Tax Policy Project, "Block Grants to the States: Risks and Responsibilities," 18 April 1995, p. 3. See also, U.S. General Accounting Office, Block Grants: Characteristics, Experience and Lessons Learned (Washington, D.C.: GAO, 1995). GAO/HEHS -95-74.
64. 57 Michigan Budget and Tax Policy Project, "Block Grants to the States: Risks and Responsibilities," 18 April 1995, p. 3. See also, U.S. General Accounting Office, Block Grants: Characteristics, Experience and Lessons Learned (Washington, D.C.: GAO, 1995). GAO/HEHS -95-74.
65. 58 Paul R. Blackey and Larry DeBoer, "Explaining State Government Discretionary Revenue Increases in Fiscal Years 1991 and 1992," National Tax Journal 46 (March 1993): 1.
66. 59 Carol S. Weissert, "Medicaid in the 1990s: Trends, Innovations, and the Future of the 'PAC-Man' of State Budgets," Publius: The Journal of Federalism 22 (Summer 1992): 93-109.
67. 60 David Baer and Lee Cohen, The State Economic, Demographic and Fiscal Handbook, 1994 (Washington, D.C.: The Public Policy Institute, American Association of Retired Persons, 1996), Table 9.
68. 61 Calculated from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 15th ed. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995), p. 34.
69. 62 Carl W. Stenberg, "Recent Trends in State Spending: Patterns, Problems, Prospects," Publius. The Journal of Federalism 24 (Summer 1994): 135-152.
70. 63 U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, RTS 1991: State Revenue Capacity and Effort (Washington, D.C.: ACIR, 1993).
71. 64 Ibid.
72. 65 U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Significant Features of Fiscal Federalism vol. 2, (Washington, D.C.: ACIR, 1993), pp. 14-19.
73. 66 James M. Poterba, "State Responses to Fiscal Crises: The Effects of Budgetary Institutions and Politics," The Journal of Political Economy 102 (August 1994): 812-816.
74. 67 Daniel J. Elazar, American Federalism: A View from the States, 3rd ed. (New York: Harper and Row, 1984).
75. 68 Poterba, "State Responses to Fiscal Crises," 816-818.
76. 69 Arturo Perez, "State Fiscal Outlook for 1996," Legislative Finance Paper No. 101 (Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1996), pp. 1-38, Table 3.
77. 70 Richard P. Nathan and Fred C. Doolittle, "Federal Grants: Giving and Taking Away," Political Science Quarterly 100 (Spring 1985): 73.
78. 71 Ibid.
79. 72 Richard P. Nathan and Fred C. Doolittle et al., Reagan and the States (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987), pp. 67-98.
80. 73 On general revenue sharing, see Bruce A. Wallin, "General Revenue Sharing: Lessons From aTerminated Program," (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, 10-12 April 1990).
81. 74 Kenneth F. Scheve, Jr. Paul E. Peterson, and Mark C Rom, "State Welfare Policy: A Race to the Bottom." (paper prepared for the National Association for Welfare Research and Statistics annual research conference. Jackson, WY, 10-13 September 1995).
82. 75 Michael A. Pagano, City Fiscal Conditions in 1994 (Washington, D.C.: National League of Cities, 1994.
83. 76 U. S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Changing Public Attitudes on Governments and Taxes 1993 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1993), p. 1.
84. 77 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992).
85. 78 Linda Greenhouse, "Justices Hear Attack on Waste Law," The New York Times, 31 March 1992, p. A15.