The effect of school finance reforms on the level and growth of per-pupil expenditures

Peabody Journal of Education

Volumn 81, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 1-38

  Downes, Thomas A ^a   Shah, Mona P ^a  

^a TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749028467     PISSN: 0161956X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327930pje8103_1     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Aaronson, D. (1999, March). The effect of school finance reform on population heterogeneity. National Tax Journal, 52, 5-29.
2. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1992). Significant features of fiscal federalism, Washington, DC: Author.
3. Bahl, R., Sjoquist, D., & Williams, W. L. (1990). School finance reform and impact on property taxes. In Proceedings of the Eighty-Third Annual Congress of the National Tax Association - Tax Institute of America (pp. 163-171). Columbus, OH: National Tax Association.
4. Bergstrom, T. C., & Goodman, R. P. (1973). Private demands for public goods. American Economic Review, 63, 280-296.
5. Berne, R., & Stiefel, L. (1983, Spring). Changes in school finance equity: A national perspective. Journal of Education Finance, 8, 419-435.
6. Center for Urban Policy and the Environment, Indiana University, and Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1995). Tax and expenditure limits on local governments: An information report. Washington, DC: Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
7. Cohn, E., & Geske, T. G. (1990). The economics of education, New York: Pergamon.
8. Courant, P. N., & Loeb, S. (1997, Winter). Centralization of school finance in Michigan. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16, 114-136.
9. Craig, S., & Inman, R. P. (1986). Education, welfare, and the "new" federalism: State budgeting in a federalist public economy. In H. S. Rosen (Ed.), Studies in state and local public finance (pp. 187-222). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
10. Downes, T. A. (1992, December). Evaluating the impact of school finance reform on the provision of public education: The California case. National Tax Journal, 45, 405-419.
11. Downes, T. A. (2004). School finance reform and school quality: Lessons from Vermont. In J. Yinger (Ed.), Helping children left behind (pp. 283-313). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Downes, T. A., & Pogue, T. F. (1994a). Accounting for fiscal capacity and need in the design of school aid formulas. In J. E. Anderson (Ed.), Fiscal equalization for state and local government finance (pp. 55-83). New York: Praeger.
13. Downes, T. A., & Pogue, T. F. (1994b, March). Adjusting school aid formulas for the higher cost of educating disadvantaged students. National Tax Journal, 47, 89-110.
14. Downes, T. A., & Schoeman, D. (1998, May). School financing reform and private school enrollment: Evidence from California. Journal of Urban Economics, 43, 418-443.
15. Elections Research Center. (1992). America votes (Vol. 20). Washington, DC: Author.
16. Figlio, D. N. (1997, September). Did the "tax revolt" reduce school performance? Journal of Public Economics, 65, 245-269.
17. Fischel, W. A. (1989, December). Did Serrano cause Proposition 13? National Tax Journal, 42, 465-473.
18. Fischel, W. A. (1992, March). Property taxation and the Tiebout model: Evidence for the benefit view from zoning and voting. Journal of Economic Literature, 30, 171-177.
19. Fischel, W. A. (1996). How Serrano caused Proposition 13. Journal of Law and Politics, 12, 607-636.
20. Forbes, K. F., & Zampelli, E. M. (1989, June). Is Leviathan a mythical beast? The American Economic Review, 79, 568-577.
21. Gold, S. D., Smith, D. M., Lawton, S. B., & Hyary, A. C. (1992). Public school finance programs of the United States and Canada, 1990-91 (Vol. 1). Albany, NY: Center for the Study of the States.
22. Greene, K. E., & Parliament, T. J. (1980, June). Political externalities, efficiency, and the welfare losses from consolidation. National Tax Journal, 33, 209-217.
23. Grymes, J. A., & Harwath, I. B. (1992). Historical trends: State sducation from 1969 to 1989. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
24. Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (1997, Winter). Understanding the twentieth century explosion in U.S. school spending. Journal of Human Resources, 32, 35-68.
25. Hickrod, G. A., Franklin, D. M., Hubbard, B. C., Hines, E. R., Polite, M. M., & Pruyne, G. B. (1992). Guilty governments: The problem of inadequate educational funding in Illinois and other states (MacArthur/ Spencer Series No. 8). Normal, IL: Center for the Study of Educational Finance.
26. Hickrod, G. A., Hines, E. R., Anthony, G. P., Dively. J. A., & Pruyne, G. B. (1992, September). The effect of constitutional litigation on educational finance: A preliminary analysis [Mimeograph]. Normal, IL: Center for the Study of Educational Finance.
27. Holtz-Eakin, D. (1992, July). Elections and aggregation: Interpreting econometric analyses of local governments. Public Choice, 74, 17-42.
28. Holtz-Eakin, D. (1994, February). Public sector capital and the productivity puzzle. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76, 12-21.
29. Hoxby, C. M. (2001, November). All school finance equalizations are not created equal: Marginal tax rates matter. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 1189-1231.
30. Inman, R. P. (1978, Winter). Testing political economy's "as if" proposition: Is the median voter really decisive? Public Choice, 33, 45-65.
31. Inman, R. P., & Ingberman, D. E. (1988). The political economy of fiscal policy. In P. B. Hare (Ed.), The political economy of fiscal policy: Surveys in public sector economics (pp. 105-160). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
32. Kenny, L. W., & Schmidt, A. B. (1994, January). The decline in the number of school districts in the U.S.: 1950-1980. Public Choice, 79, 1-18.
33. Koski, W. S. (2003). Of fuzzy standards and institutional constraints: A re-examination of the history of educational finance reform litigation. Santa Clara Law Review, 43, 1185-1298.
34. Leyden, D. P. (1992). Court-mandated changes in educational grant structure. Public Finance, 47, 229-247.
35. Manwaring, R. L., & Sheffrin, S. M. (1997). Litigation, school finance reform, and aggregate educational spending. International Tax and Public Finance, 4, 107-127.
36. McCarty, T. A., & Wyckoff, J. H. (1994, October). State expenditure growth rates: A comparison across states [Mimeograph]. Schenectady, NY: Union College.
37. Murray, S. E,, Evans, W. N., & Schwab, R. M. (1998, September). Education finance reform and the distribution of education resources. American Economic Review, 88, 789-812.
38. National Education Association of the United States. (1992). NEA handbook, 1991-92. Washington, DC: Author.
39. Pelzman, S. (1993, April). The political economy of the decline of American public education. Journal of Law and Economics, 36, 331-370.
40. Picus, L. O. (1991, Summer). Cadillacs or Chevrolets?: The evolution of state control over school finance in California. Journal of Education Finance, 17, 33-59.
41. Poterba, J. M. (1994, August). State responses to fiscal crises: The effects of budgetary institutions and politics. Journal of Political Economy, 102, 799-821.
42. Silva, F., & Sonstelie, J. (1995, June). Did Serrano cause a decline in school spending? National Tax Journal, 48, 199-215.
43. Springer, M. G., Liu, K., & Guthrie, J. W. (2005, September). The impact of education finance litigation reform on resource distribution: Is there anything special about adequacy? [Mimeograph]. Nashville, TN: Peabody College of Vanderbilt University.
44. Theobald, N, D., & Picus, L. O. (1991, Summer). Living with equal amounts of less: Experiences with primarily state-funded school systems. Journal of Education Finance, 17, 1-6.
45. Tiebout, C. M. (1956, October). A pure theory of local public expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416-424.
46. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1978a). Money income and poverty status of and persons in the United States and the North Central region, by divisions and states (Current Population Reports, Series No, P60-111). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
47. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1978b). Money income and poverty status of and persons in the United States and the Northeast region, by division and states (Current Population Reports, Series No. P60-110). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
48. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1978c). Money income and poverty status of and persons in the United States and the South region, by divisions and states (Current Population Reports, Series No. P60-112). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
49. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1978d). Money income and poverty status of and persons in the United States and the West region, by divisions and states (Current Population Reports, Series No. P60-113). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
50. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1993). Money income of households, families, and persons in the United States: 1992 (Current Population Reports, Series No. P60-184). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
51. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1970-1993). Statistical abstract of the United States, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
52. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1975-1993). Digest of education statistics. Washington, DC: Author.
53. Wallis, J. J., & Oates, W. E. (1988). Decentralization in the public sector: An empirical study of state and local government. In H. S. Rosen (Ed.), Fiscal federalism: Quantitative studies (pp. 5-28). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.