Objective. Attribution of responsibility for government performance in a federalist system is challenging but necessary for democratic accountability. We identify competing hypotheses for how attributions for government performance might arise in social media and test our expectations using data drawn from Twitter following Hurricane Sandy. Method. We use a novel linguistic approach to measure blame attributions in text and compare patterns of blame attributions toward multiple levels of government over time. Results. Social media blame attributions emerge at the outset of the storm and are more likely to center on federal actors, followed by local actors. State actors received the least blame. We find similar patterns in retweets. Conclusion. Our results suggest that social media privileges attributions that target broadly salient national political actors; however, social media accounts of disaster may make it easier for the public to assess performance of local and state government.Accurate attribution of responsibility for government performance in a federalist system is challenging but necessary for democratic accountability. Disasters provide an important lens to examine how attribution of responsibility arises and becomes fixed on particular levels of government because researchers can observe the spread of the public and government responses as events unfold over time beginning from an initial exogenous shock. From the outset, government officials and news media seek to bring attention to impending disasters (Yeo and Knox, 2018) and communicate critical information to the public (Pudlo, Robinson, and Wehde, 2018), both of which influence disaster preparedness, management, and resilience. Through traditional and social media, a broad public has a front-row seat to evaluate the performance of government. Emotion-laden evaluations in these critical moments shape public trust in government (Reinhardt, 2018), set public expectations about future performance, and drive policy and voting preferences (Atkeson and Maestas, 2012;Darr, Cate, and Moak, 2018).These characteristics make catastrophic natural disasters a unique and fruitful venue for studying blame attribution in federalist democracies. Disasters are unexpected events that capture the attention of the media and the public, emotionally engage them, and direct

This paper examines whether rail transit stations tend to increase employment opportunities in nearby neighbourhoods and whether rail transit tends to be placed in neighbourhoods which connects to higher‐wage jobs. The results show no significant relative increase in the level of employment in neighbourhoods near rail stations post opening of the first light rail line in Charlotte, NC. However, the line connects to areas with significantly higher shares of high‐wage workers and industries. While creating accessibility to higher‐skilled jobs may result in greater economic impacts, it may conflict with goals of increasing employment opportunities for transit dependent, lower‐wage workers.

Tiebout's theory of local expenditures predicts the efficient provision of local tax and expenditure bundles via market forces occur when individuals “vote with their feet” (Tiebout 1956). Private amenity choices may distort market signals to local governments. Thus we conduct a conjoint experiment to explore how citizens make choices among hypothetical apartment homes, varying public and club good attributes. This allows us to vary both apartment community and city amenities independently to determine whether private club or public amenities are more influential in shaping residency choices. Regardless of the quality of city services, citizens on average are willing to pay for an additional layer of safety provided by an apartment complex. We conclude that the city's tax expenditure bundle is not the only consideration in residential location choice, suggesting that there is disruption in the efficient provision of public goods.

No abstract