Trends in Public–Private Pay Parity in State and Local Governments

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 303-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory B. Lewis ◽  
Rahul Pathak ◽  
Chester S. Galloway
Keyword(s):  
Private Sector ◽  
Labor Economics ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
College Graduates ◽  
Census Data ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Public Employees ◽  
Total Compensation ◽  
Economics Model ◽  
State And Local

Have state and local governments (SLGs) achieved pay parity with the private sector? The answer depends on how one defines parity. Using a standard labor economics model on U.S. Census data from 1990 to 2014, we find different patterns if we focus on pay, on pay plus benefits, or on total compensation within an occupation. All approaches indicate that pay is higher in local than in state governments and that Blacks, Hispanics, and employees without college diplomas earn higher pay in SLGs than in the private sector. In contrast, Whites, Asians, and college graduates are less likely to enjoy higher pay working in SLGs than in the private sector. Unsurprisingly, states with more liberal and Democratic legislatures pay public employees better, relative to workers in the private sector.

scholarly journals The Lesson from the Modern American Federalism: A Challenge to Effective Public Policy Performance

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 300-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geiguen Shin
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Power Relationship ◽  
Federal System ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Quarter Century ◽  
Policy Performance ◽  
The Past ◽  
State And Local ◽  
American Federalism

Abstract Contemporary U.S. federalism particularly since the late1960s has evolved over the course of pluralism alternating exercisable governmental powers between the federal and state governments. The complexity of the power relationship has been observed in a variety of policies during the past quarter-century as has the discussion of whether or not contemporary U.S. federalism has developed in a way that increase effective public policy performance. Focusing mainly on the period of the past 50 years of U.S. federalism history, this article suggests that federalism dynamics have not exercised either constant liberal or conservative influence on public policy performance. Instead, this article suggests that the clear functional responsibility between the federal government and state and local governments have characterized contemporary U.S. federalism-more federal responsibility for redistribution and more state and local responsibility for development, which in turn increased public policy performance. This feature has been quite substantial since 1970s. As a result, this article suggests that despite the increased complexity of the U.S. federal system, it has evolved in such an appropriate way that would increase the efficiency of federal system by dividing a clear intergovernmental responsibility on major policy platforms.

Government and Fiscal Policy in American Economic History

2018 ◽  
pp. 194-224
Author(s):  
John Joseph Wallis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Property Tax ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Payroll Taxes ◽  
The Third ◽  
State And Local

Over the last 225 years, government finances in the United States have gone through three distinct stages. In the first stage, 1790–1850, state governments actively pursued policies to promote economic development and financed them from revenues from state investments. In the second, 1850–1930, local governments became the most important level of government, as measured by revenues and expenditures, and revenues shifted toward the property tax. In the third period, 1930 to the present, the national government became the most active and largest level of government, financed through income and payroll taxes, and developed an extensive network of grants to state and local governments. The chapter tracks the changes in sources of revenues and purpose of expenditures, with specific attention paid to military spending over the entire period.

Inter-Governmental Relations in the Provision of Local E-Services

2011 ◽  
pp. 1120-1124
Author(s):  
R. Kelso
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Political Commentary ◽  
Commonwealth Government ◽  
State And Local

Australia is a nation of 20 million citizens occupying approximately the same land mass as the continental U.S. More than 80% of the population lives in the state capitals where the majority of state and federal government offices and employees are based. The heavily populated areas on the Eastern seaboard, including all of the six state capitals have advanced ICT capability and infrastructure and Australians readily adopt new technologies. However, there is recognition of a digital divide which corresponds with the “great dividing” mountain range separating the sparsely populated arid interior from the populated coastal regions (Trebeck, 2000). A common theme in political commentary is that Australians are “over-governed” with three levels of government, federal, state, and local. Many of the citizens living in isolated regions would say “over-governed” and “underserviced.” Most of the state and local governments, “… have experienced difficulties in managing the relative dis-economies of scale associated with their small and often scattered populations.” Rural and isolated regions are the first to suffer cutbacks in government services in periods of economic stringency. (O’Faircheallaigh, Wanna, & Weller, 1999, p. 98). Australia has, in addition to the Commonwealth government in Canberra, two territory governments, six state governments, and about 700 local governments. All three levels of government, federal, state, and local, have employed ICTs to address the “tyranny of distance” (Blainey, 1967), a term modified and used for nearly 40 years to describe the isolation and disadvantage experienced by residents in remote and regional Australia. While the three levels of Australian governments have been working co-operatively since federation in 1901 with the federal government progressively increasing its power over that time, their agencies and departments generally maintain high levels of separation; the Queensland Government Agent Program is the exception.

Local Fiscal Behavior Under Subnational Provisions

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yilin Hou
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Local Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Local Policy ◽  
Policy Interactions ◽  
Local Finance ◽  
Fiscal Behavior ◽  
State And Local

Abstract This study examines fiscal policy interactions between state and local governments. Research in this area has been increasing but remains inadequate, especially on local policy options during economic downturns. State governments oversee local finances, also provide financial assistance; localities are expected to adopt counter-cyclical fiscal policies (CCFP). There has been an increasing literature on CCFP at the state level, but little on the local level. This paper uses U.S. county data for empirical analysis and attempts to move closer to consensus on the determinants of local savings and their effects on outlays. I find no evidence that localities smooth across boom-bust cycles; i.e., they do not save for revenue shortfalls. I find that state fiscal institutions cast real impact on local finance. These shed light on local policy making, also add to existing evidence for subnational policy design.

scholarly journals From Backwaters to Major Policymakers: Policy Polarization in the States, 1970–2014

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 416-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob M. Grumbach
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
State Government ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Socioeconomic Outcomes ◽  
Party Control ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Policy Variation

Political scientists often characterize state and local governments as marginal and highly constrained in policymaking. However, I suggest that in recent decades state governments have moved from the margins to the center of partisan battles over the direction of U.S. public policy. Across 16 issue areas, I investigate interstate policy variation, policy differences across states, and policy polarization, the changing relationship between party control of state government and policy outcomes. Since the 1970s, interstate variation has increased such that an individual’s tax burden, right to obtain an abortion, and other relationships to government are increasingly determined by her state of residence. Policy polarization increases dramatically after 2000 in 14 of the 16 areas. I show that party control increasingly predicts socioeconomic outcomes in the polarized area of health care, but not in the nonpolarized area of criminal justice.

Train Horn Noise Impact Assessment Model

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jade Huang ◽  
Jeffery E. Warner
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Census Data ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Noise Impact ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Train Speed ◽  
Effective Deterrent ◽  
State And Local

Train horn noise has been long regarded as a nuisance to the residents of the adjacent communities, in spite of the fact that train horn is an effective deterrent to accidents at highway-rail grade crossings. Federal, state, and local governments are making efforts in mitigating the negative effect of train horn noise. This paper utilized census data and train speed and volume information to develop a GIS-based model that exhibits the train horn noise impact on adjacent populations and demonstrates how these impacts change with altered rail operations. This model serves as a tool for planners, engineers, and decision-makers to gain a better understanding of the most affected areas, thus pursue the most appropriate mitigation measures for the localities.

scholarly journals Effect of Apportioned Federal Revenue on Economic Growth: The Nigerian Experience

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
Cordelia Onyinyechi Omodero
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Time Series Data ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Negative Influence ◽  
Least Square ◽  
Series Data ◽  
Federal State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
State And Local

The major objective of income distribution to the federal, state and local governments in Nigeria is to achieve economic growth which leads to economic development. This ultimate aim of governance in Nigeria appears not to have been achieved due to alleged corruption and mismanagement of the monthly allocated funds. Thus, this study investigates the effect of revenue apportioned to the three levels of government on economic growth in Nigeria.  The study employs annual time series data which cover a period from 1981-2016 and have been collected from CBN Statistical Bulletin, 2016 edition. Ordinary Least Square (OLS) method is used to perform the multi-regression analysis with the aid of e-views version 9. The findings of the study reveal that the federally apportioned revenue to the federal government (FAFG) has a significant positive impact on RGDP while FALG has a robust significant positive impact on RGDP. The result also indicates that FASG has a significant negative influence on RGDP. This leads to a conclusion that mismanagement of funds by the state governments is a cause for concern. Therefore, the study suggests, among others, that revenue sharing formula in the country should be based more on impact of expenditure incurred on executed projects (long term and short term) by each tier of government than on any other parameter to achieve fairness and efficiency in public service delivery at all levels of governance.

Inter-Governmental Relations in the Provision of Local E-Services

2008 ◽  
pp. 2439-2451
Author(s):  
Robert Kelso
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal State ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Political Commentary ◽  
Commonwealth Government ◽  
State And Local

Australia is a nation of 20 million citizens occupying approximately the same land mass as the continental U.S. More than 80% of the population lives in the state capitals where the majority of state and federal government offices and employees are based. The heavily populated areas on the Eastern seaboard, including all of the six state capitals have advanced ICT capability and infrastructure and Australians readily adopt new technologies. However, there is recognition of a digital divide which corresponds with the “great dividing” mountain range separating the sparsely populated arid interior from the populated coastal regions (Trebeck, 2000). A common theme in political commentary is that Australians are “over-governed” with three levels of government, federal, state, and local. Many of the citizens living in isolated regions would say “over-governed” and “underserviced.” Most of the state and local governments, “… have experienced difficulties in managing the relative dis-economies of scale associated with their small and often scattered populations.” Rural and isolated regions are the first to suffer cutbacks in government services in periods of economic stringency. (O’Faircheallaigh, Wanna, & Weller, 1999, p. 98). Australia has, in addition to the Commonwealth government in Canberra, two territory governments, six state governments, and about 700 local governments. All three levels of government, federal, state, and local, have employed ICTs to address the “tyranny of distance” (Blainey, 1967), a term modified and used for nearly 40 years to describe the isolation and disadvantage experienced by residents in remote and regional Australia. While the three levels of Australian governments have been working co-operatively since federation in 1901 with the federal government progressively increasing its power over that time, their agencies and departments generally maintain high levels of separation; the Queensland Government Agent Program is the exception.

The Birth of the Old Federalism: Financing the New Deal, 1932–1940

1984 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Joseph Wallis
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
New Deal ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Government Expenditures ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Relative Importance ◽  
Federal Grants ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Relative Decline ◽  
The New Deal

The relative importance of federal and local government was reversed between 1932 and 1940. This changing composition of government expenditures by level of government accounts for the rise of “big” government during the Depression. State governments expanded their fiscal activity, maintaining their share of total government expenditures. Utilizing data on federal grants and state and local expenditures, I find that the relative decline of local governments and sustained growth of state governments can be explained by the financial and administrative provisions of the federal New Deal programs.

Comparison of State and Local Employee Benefits and Private Employee Benefits

1991 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Perry Moore
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Employee Benefits ◽  
Public Employees ◽  
Total Compensation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Personnel Costs ◽  
Compensation Package ◽  
State And Local

This paper compares the level of benefits offered to state and local employees in the United States with those provided to private employees of medium and large firms. The public employees enjoy more paid leaves, less expensive health benefits and better pensions. The conclusion points to the additional public personnel costs created by these advantages and addresses the role of benefits in the total compensation package. It also urges that total compensation comparability (pay and benefits) be more widely practiced by public jurisdictions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document