From Revenue Sharing to Deficit Sharing: General Revenue Sharing and CitiesOnce hailed as a revolutionary change in U.S. federal aid policy that would return power to state and local governments, General Revenue Sharing was politically dead a decade later. Bruce A. Wallin now offers the only complete history of the General Revenue Sharing program — why it passed, why state and local governments used it the way they did, and why it died. He examines its unique role in the history of U.S. federalism and explores its relevance to intergovernmental aid policy at the turn of a new century. This book is crucial to understanding the changed environment of U.S. intergovernmental relations in the 1990’s and makes a strong case for reconsidering a program of federal unrestricted aid. |
Contents
| xi | |
| xii | |
| 5 | |
| 7 | |
| 14 | |
THE ANALYSIS EXPANDEDTHE PROGRAM ENDS | 17 |
NOTES | 20 |
The Politics of Passage An Idea Whose Time Had Come and Whose Timing Was Right | 23 |
NOTES | 91 |
Between the Idea and the Reality General Revenue Sharing Is Terminated | 94 |
THE STATES LOSE THEIR SHARE | 101 |
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HANG ON | 110 |
THE DEATH OF GENERAL REVENUE SHARING | 115 |
ANALYSIS | 118 |
SUMMARY | 127 |
NOTES | 128 |
GROWTH OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ROLE | 25 |
THE GRANTINAID SYSTEM | 27 |
GENERAL REVENUE SHARING | 31 |
SUMMARY | 48 |
NOTES | 50 |
City Dynamics and Decisions General Revenue Sharing at City Hall | 54 |
INITIAL IMPACTSTHE 1974 SURVEY | 64 |
REVENUE SHARING AT TWELVETHE 1984 SURVEY | 82 |
FINAL USESTHE 1988 SURVEY | 85 |
OTHER STUDIES | 86 |
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS | 88 |
Life After Death | 133 |
THE DIFFICULTY OF ENACTING FEDERAL AID POLICY | 135 |
THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOBBY | 137 |
DEVOLUTION | 138 |
PRESENT AND FUTURE REVENUE SHARING | 143 |
CONCLUSION | 147 |
NOTES | 149 |
Cities in Survey | 153 |
Index | 155 |
Other editions - View all
From Revenue Sharing to Deficit Sharing: General Revenue Sharing and Cities Bruce Wallin No preview available - 1998 |
From Revenue Sharing to Deficit Sharing: General Revenue Sharing and Cities Bruce Wallin No preview available - 1998 |
Common terms and phrases
1st Choice Aaron Wildavsky argued billion California cities capital improvements categorical grants city budget city chief executives city council city officials Commission on Intergovernmental Committee Community Group Pressure Congressional Quarterly Weekly decisions deficit reduction devolution enacted Expand Services expected expenditure areas federal aid federal aid program federal budget federal government federal grant federal system Finance fiscal drag Fiscal Federalism fiscal imbalance House important increase Initiate New Programs interest groups intergovernmental aid Intergovernmental Relations Jersey cities Jim Martin maintain existing services Maintain Services mayors members of Congress ment municipal budgeting national government Nixon passage percent political President proposed public choice theory Quarterly Weekly Report raised reauthorization Reduce Property Taxes response result revenue sharing funds Revenue Sharing program revenue sharing's Richard Nixon Ronald Reagan Senate spending Table targeted tax competition termination tion U.S. Advisory Commission U.S. Government Printing unrestricted aid Vertical fiscal imbalance vote Washington
Popular passages
Page 6 - ... government— because we are going to provide more centers of power where what you do can make a difference that you can see and feel in your own life and the life of your whole community." The further away government is from people, the stronger government becomes and the weaker people become. And a nation with a strong government and a weak people is an empty shell. I reject the patronizing idea that government in Washington, DC is inevitably more wise, more honest and more efficient than government...
Page 8 - Revenue sharing is intended to allocate to the States and local governments, on a permanent basis, a portion of the very productive and highly "growth-elastic" receipts of the Federal Government. The bulk of Federal revenues is derived from income taxes, which rise at a faster rate than income as income grows. By contrast, State-local revenues barely keep pace with income. State-local needs have outstripped the potentialities of their revenue system at constant tax rates, with the result that...