Data for Alabama Taxation and Changing Discourse from Reconstruction to Redemption

At their most basic level taxes carry, in the words of Schumpeter ([1918] 1991), “the thunder of history” (p. 101). They say something about the ever-changing structures of social, economic, and political life. Taxes offer a blueprint, in both symbolic and concrete terms, for uncovering the most fundamental arrangements in society – stratification included. The historical retellings captured within these data highlight the politics of taxation in Alabama from 1856 to 1901, including conflicts over whom money is expended upon as well as struggles over who carries their fair share of the tax burden. The selected timeline overlaps with the formation of five of six constitutions adopted in the State of Alabama, including 1861, 1865, 1868, 1875, and 1901. Having these years as the focal point makes for an especially meaningful case study, given how much these constitutional formations made the state a site for much political debate. These data contain 5,121 pages of periodicals from newspapers throughout the state, including: Alabama Sentinel, Alabama State Intelligencer, Alabama State Journal, Athens Herald, Daily Alabama Journal, Daily Confederation, Elyton Herald, Mobile Daily Tribune, Mobile Tribune, Mobile Weekly Tribune, Morning Herald, Nationalist, New Era, Observer, Tuscaloosa Observer, Tuskegee News, Universalist Herald, and Wilcox News and Pacificator. The contemporary relevance of these historical debates manifests in Alabama’s current constitution which was adopted in 1901. This constitution departs from well-established conventions of treating the document as a legal framework that specifies a general role of governance but is firm enough to protect the civil rights and liberties of the population. Instead, it stands more as a legislative document, or procedural straightjacket, that preempts through statutory material what regulatory action is possible by the state. These barriers included a refusal to establish a state board of education and enact a tax structure for local education in addition to debt and tax limitations that constrained government capacity more broadly. Prohibitive features like these are among the reasons that, by 2020, the 1901 Constitution has been amended nearly 1,000 times since its adoption. However, similar procedural barriers have been duplicated across the U.S. since (e.g., California’s Proposition 13 of 1978). Reference: Schumpeter, Joseph. [1918] 1991. “The Crisis of the Tax State.” Pp. 99-140 in The Economics and Sociology of Capitalism, edited by Richard Swedberg. Princeton University Press.

Stirrings of Revolt: Regressive Levies, the Pocketbook Squeeze, and the 1960s Roots of the 1970s Tax Revolt

In most accounts, the modern American “tax revolt” begins with Proposition 13, passed by California voters in June 1978. In this telling, the revolt represents an antigovernment, antiliberal shift among white homeowners instrumental in the “rise of the right” and the fall of the “New Deal order” that culminated in Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980 and his subsequent tax cuts. This article challenges that account by demonstrating that the revolt began more than a decade before Prop 13 as approval rates for local levies and bonds reached all-time lows. This local revolt was not limited to whites, nor did it portend rising conservatism. Instead, it was rooted in lower- and middle-income Americans’ frustrations with steep rises in unfair, regressive taxes during the post–World War II decades. The Kennedy-Johnson “Growth Liberals,” who were busy cutting progressive federal taxes at the same time that regressive state and local taxes were soaring, missed this pocketbook squeeze, thereby setting the stage for later events like Prop 13.

Proposition 13: An Equilibrium Analysis

There are many federal, state, and local laws that distort housing decisions and prices. However, it is often difficult to tease out the quantitative impact of such policies. In this paper, we examine the implications of one of the most significant tax changes initiated by voters in the United States on house prices, housing turnover, and household welfare. In 1978 California passed Proposition 13, which lowered property tax rates and restricted future property tax increases. We find that the introduction of Proposition 13 leads to a 15 percent increase in house prices and a 3.3 percent decrease in the moving rates. The elimination of Proposition 13, however, leads to modest changes in house prices and mobility but sizable welfare gains. (JEL E13, G21, H71, R21, R31)