Mad” About Mandates

The Issue of Who Should Pay for What Resurfaces in the 1990s

Bibliographic Data

ID6375672
AuthorsSusan A Macmanu, SUSAN A MacMANUS
Year1991
Volume21
Issue3
Pages59-75
Publication date1991-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePublius The Journal of Federalism (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0048-5950 • E-ISSN: 1747-7107
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a037958
OpenAlexW2329457384
LanguageEN
Citations received7

In 1990, constitutional amendment proposals were put before the voters in Florida and Wisconsin (nonbinding) to limit unfunded state mandates. This brought the number of states with constitutionally based mandate-reimbursement requirements to fifteen. Voter support was garnered by attributing local property-tax increasesand loss oflocalcontrol over spending priorities to unfundedstate mandates. The Florida and Wisconsin efforts came close on the heels of stale mandate studies by the U.S. General Accounting Office, National Conference of State Legislatures, Urban Institute, and U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Fifty-two hypotheses are generatedfrom these studies and the Florida and Wisconsin cases to help structure future research. As the mandate limitation movement spreads, larger data bases will be available with which to test these propositions. In the states that already have limits on unfunded state mandates, research will shift to the policy consequences of these restrictions

Commission · Economics · Law and economics · Legislation · Legislature · Mandate · Political science · State (computer science · Unfunded mandate · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Fiscal Policies and Political Economy · Law · Local Government Finance and Decentralization · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOI