Do Earmarks Target Low-Income and Minority Communities? Evidence from US Drinking Water /
Keiser, David A.
Do Earmarks Target Low-Income and Minority Communities? Evidence from US Drinking Water / David A. Keiser, Bhashkar Mazumder, David Molitor, Joseph S. Shapiro, Brant J. Walker. - Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research 2024. - 1 online resource: illustrations (black and white); - NBER working paper series no. w32058 . - Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research) no. w32058. .
January 2024.
The quality and inequality of US drinking water investments have gained attention after recent environmental disasters in Flint, Michigan, and elsewhere. We compare the formula-based targeting of subsidized loans provided under the Safe Drinking Water Act with the targeting of congressional drinking water earmarks ("pork barrel" spending). Earmarks are often critiqued for potentially privileging wealthier and more politically connected communities. We find that earmarks target Black, Hispanic, and low-income communities, partly due to targeting water systems serving large populations. Earmark and loan targeting differ significantly across all the demographics we analyze. Compared to Safe Drinking Water Act loans, earmarks disproportionately target Hispanic communities but not Black or low-income communities.
System requirements: Adobe [Acrobat] Reader required for PDF files.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
Health
General
Environmental Economics
Do Earmarks Target Low-Income and Minority Communities? Evidence from US Drinking Water / David A. Keiser, Bhashkar Mazumder, David Molitor, Joseph S. Shapiro, Brant J. Walker. - Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research 2024. - 1 online resource: illustrations (black and white); - NBER working paper series no. w32058 . - Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research) no. w32058. .
January 2024.
The quality and inequality of US drinking water investments have gained attention after recent environmental disasters in Flint, Michigan, and elsewhere. We compare the formula-based targeting of subsidized loans provided under the Safe Drinking Water Act with the targeting of congressional drinking water earmarks ("pork barrel" spending). Earmarks are often critiqued for potentially privileging wealthier and more politically connected communities. We find that earmarks target Black, Hispanic, and low-income communities, partly due to targeting water systems serving large populations. Earmark and loan targeting differ significantly across all the demographics we analyze. Compared to Safe Drinking Water Act loans, earmarks disproportionately target Hispanic communities but not Black or low-income communities.
System requirements: Adobe [Acrobat] Reader required for PDF files.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
Health
General
Environmental Economics