Search results

"There is a large literature demonstrating that positive economic conditions increase support for incumbent candidates, but little understanding of how economic conditions affect preferences for parties and for particulars of their platforms. We ask how exogenous shifts to the value of residents' human capital affect voting behavior in California neighborhoods. As predicted by economic theory, we find that positive economic shocks decrease support for redistributive policies. More notably, we find that conservative voting on a wide variety of ballot propositions -- from crime to gambling to campaign finance -- is increasing in economic well being. We further show that positive economic circumstances decrease turnout and have a mixed impact on candidate choice, highlighting a limitation of inferring policy preferences from party choice"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

AbstractWe examine how county governments respond to plausibly random increases in the local tax base generated by wind energy installations using data on the universe of U.S. installations from 1995 through 2017. Wind energy installation led to large increases in county revenue and expenditures, with county governments using this revenue to prioritize spending on highways and hospitals. We also find that wind energy installation led to increases in county property values, suggesting that residents value the enhancements to local public services, property tax reductions, or other changes to local amenities that accompany wind energy installation.

AbstractA small but growing literature suggests that simply using the word "tax" can create a visceral negative reaction among citizens. We tested tax word aversion using a representative sample of US residents who are randomly placed into experimental conditions and asked parallel questions about their support for services (approval of a tax increase or a revenue increase). The only difference between the two questions is the word "tax." We find that the use of the word "tax" lowers support by about six and eight percentage points for fire and school services, respectively. This direct test of tax word aversion is based on a strong experimental design and a sufficient number of observations (over 4000) that allow for precise impact estimates.

AbstractThis article reports on an experiment testing whether additional information influences support for bond referenda. Respondents were randomly assigned to treatment conditions that varied the way the potential implications of property tax increases were presented to voters. The results show a persistent negative effect of tax information on the probability of support for school bond referenda across all treatments. Specifically, the results show that the probability of voting yes decreased by 6 to 9 percentage points, depending on the treatment. This result persists across multiple specifications and robustness tests. The effects are consistent across populations, with only those with high levels of education showing no statistically significant effect of the treatment on their support for school referenda.Evidence for Practice

Some states require bond referenda to include statements that seek to make plain the connection between ballot passage and property taxes, while others do not.
We find a persistent negative effect of property tax information on the probability of support for school bond referenda of 6 to 9 percentage points, depending on the wording.
This line of research has become increasingly important to public policy making given that about half the states, including the largest state, California, have some type of property tax wording requirements for referenda.
We argue that providing wording connecting property taxes to bond referenda passage is consistent with transparency efforts governments have pursued for decades. However, such wording might not improve the accuracy of information for citizens since, ultimately, the ensuing property tax levy depends on myriad factors, only one of which is debt service on bonds.

We examine whether the salience of the property tax liability implications of voting yes on a school bond referendum affects bond approval rates. We exploit the fact that school districts in Minnesota are required to explicitly note the property tax implications of voting yes on bond referenda in bold capital letters on a ballot while districts in the neighboring state of Wisconsin are only required to inform voters of the amount of bonds to be issued. Using data on local school bond passage rates from Minnesota and Wisconsin over the period 2008–2017, we find that when the property tax implications of voting yes are more salient, the fraction of voters favoring bond passage declines by approximately four to seven percentage points and the probability of bond passage falls by approximately ten percentage points. These results are robust to numerous specification checks including propensity score weighting methods and leveraging the geographic distance between school districts in Minnesota and Wisconsin.