Politicians who care about the spoils of office may underprovide a public good because its benefits cannot be targeted to voters as easily as pork-barrel spending. We compare a winner-take-all system - where all the spoils go to the winner - to a proportional system - where the spoils of office are split among candidates proportionally to their share of the vote. In a winner-take-all system the public good is provided less often than in a proportional system when the public good is particularly desirable. We then consider the electoral college system and show that it is particularly subject to this inefficiency.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||15|
|Journal||American Economic Review|
|State||Published - Mar 2001|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Economics and Econometrics