1946
DOI: 10.4159/harvard.9780674423633
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1947
1947
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Now, a major difference, Buchanan named the problem, speaking of “the dilemma of federalism” (1947: 1). Buchanan was actually not the first to use the word “dilemma” to characterize the financial problems of federal regimes in this way (Warner, 1933: 117; Corry, 1941; Ross, 1943: 888, 889; Maxwell, 1946: 39). It was James A. Maxwell and his work The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States that Buchanan cited.…”
Section: Buchanan's Second-term Paper: Ethics and The Inefficiency Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Now, a major difference, Buchanan named the problem, speaking of “the dilemma of federalism” (1947: 1). Buchanan was actually not the first to use the word “dilemma” to characterize the financial problems of federal regimes in this way (Warner, 1933: 117; Corry, 1941; Ross, 1943: 888, 889; Maxwell, 1946: 39). It was James A. Maxwell and his work The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States that Buchanan cited.…”
Section: Buchanan's Second-term Paper: Ethics and The Inefficiency Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was not very original. Most federal countries used them and many public finance specialists, including the ones Buchanan cited or quoted – Adarkar (1933), Maxwell (1946) and Blough (1935) – defended them. Buchanan himself had already mentioned that possibility earlier.…”
Section: Buchanan's Second-term Paper: Ethics and The Inefficiency Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…51 Specifi cally, through "federal assumption, " the federal government took over the administration of the program in several states that failed to meet grant requirements. 52 However, federal administrators found themselves confronted with the intricacies of petty local issues as well as reduced state cooperation and fi nancial contributions. 53 In addition, various states entered into "partnerships" with the federal government to administer their programs.…”
Section: Federal Emergency Relief Administrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…52 However, federal administrators found themselves confronted with the intricacies of petty local issues as well as reduced state cooperation and fi nancial contributions. 53 In addition, various states entered into "partnerships" with the federal government to administer their programs. 54 Before FERA, federal options in the case of noncompliance had largely been limited to the withdrawal of federal funds, which runs contrary to the interests of those federal policymakers who seek the substantive outcomes that the grants were intended to produce.…”
Section: Federal Emergency Relief Administrationmentioning
confidence: 99%