|
Abstract:
|
Government funding of highway projects has long relied on earmarked (or dedicated) revenues from excise taxes on gasoline and other user fees such as tolls as a way to tie costs to users. The rationale for dedicating revenues for a single government program is to ensure that the desired program receives enough funds to carry out its mission without having to compete against more popular programs. But does it work? Do dedicated revenues increase overall spending levels? Under what conditions? In this paper I examine the effect of states earmarking policies on their overall highway spending across time, accounting for reliance on federal transportation payments as well as controlling for economic, political, and demographic factors and including state and year fixed effects. In particular, I examine how the earmarking of all motor fuel taxes for highways and of other funds affects the level of spending on highways. I find evidence for the full "flypaper effect" in states that dedicate all their motor fuel taxes to highways and also dedicate other funds to highways. I also find evidence of partial crowd-out of highway funds for states that only dedicate one or the other or neither. However, I find no evidence that earmarking policies insulate highway spending from the effects of poor economic conditions within state borders. |