Charles B. Blankart

The Process of Government Centralization: A Constitutional View

Government centralization is not a law of nature. It can be explained on the one hand by the endeavor of locally elected representatives of national assemblies to form tax and expenditure cartels, on the other hand by the constitutional power of the federal government to take over state tax legislation and to act as a cartel enforcer. A case study provides empirical evidence and moreover shows that such cartels generate a higher tax level and perform badly in interregional equalization of per capita income. The relevance of constitutional power for explaining centralization seems to be confirmed in various countries.

Political Economics versus Public Choice Two views of political economy in competition

JEL: P48, B50, D72, E6 Abstract: Political economics, like public choice, is defined as the economic analysis of politics. But its exponents claim that political economics is not a complement, but the successor of public choice, a new paradigm replacing the public-choice approach. We evaluate this claim of political economics in three fields: political business cycles, integration and secession, and constitutional political economy. We find that political economics has contributed substantially to the first, but little to the second and the third, where it sticks to the world of planning and benevolent dictators. Hence the public-choice paradigm emerges strengthened from its dispute with political economics.

Local Public Finance

In this essay, we survey the literature on local public finance. The first part deals with the normative theory of local public finance, starting from the question when it is beneficial to decentralize public services. We then analyze the functioning of a system of competitive jurisdictions in the spirit of Tiebout. The final part of the essay deals with constitutional design. In particular, we ask when and how local governments have to be regulated in order to prevent destructive competition or contain monopoly power, and we describe which institutions might perform these tasks.

State and standards

In this paper a new economic approach to standardization has been presented. Standardization has been regarded as a problem ofgradual choice. An individual chooses to apply more or less standards within a hierarchy of standards. With this decomposition of standards, the problem of strategic market power becomes less important than in the traditional models of standardization. It becomes possible to analyze the problems of network externalities within a framework of non-strategic behavior and to apply the tools of the traditional theory of externalities and public goods. While decentralized action may lead to too little standardization, committees may overcome this deficiency to some extent, but bureaucracies are likely to lead to overstandardization. In the empirical section of the paper it has been shown that our approach can be applied to the standard-setting process in languages, railroads, and telecommunications. In all three cases the tendency of bureaucracies to generate more standardization than committees has been corroborated.

Market-oriented open network provision

Network externalities and market power due to economies of scale and sunk costs may cause a public demand for standardization of network access. There is, however, no guarantee that public institutions supplying standardization are interested in correctly matching this demand. Often it comes to overstandardization. The authors argue therefore that standards for standard setters are required and they show how such standards could be designed.

Subnational Government Organisation and Public Debt Crises

Multilevel governments can be organised according to two basic principles: the principle of autonomy and the principle of vertical public administration. In between, there are a number of mixed systems which are questionable from the point of view of distribution of responsibilities. Subnational public debt crises typically occur in mixed federal systems. Preferable to such systems are pure systems with clear responsibilities. Nevertheless, courts can establish clear liability rules and hence contribute to a stabilisation of federal systems. However, court decisions do not supersede a political choice between either of the two pure systems. Two case studies on local governments illustrate under what circumstances a system of autonomy is preferable and how this result can be applied to the European Union.

A Public Choice View of Tax Competition

The author analyzes the role of competition among governments. Although traditional public finance economists fear that competition among governments may be too strong, endangering revenue generation or leading to destructive outcomes in the Tiebout model, this article argues that competition among governments, properly understood, may promote efficiency, but natural barriers to competition require regulation by democracy.

Alternativen der parlamentarischen Demokratie

Abstract It is often said that the parliament should represent the opinions found in the population and that the government should be held accountable for its political program. It is shown in the paper that these two functions rely on two different basic models of democracy which are not fully compatible with each other: the model of a pure representative democracy and the model of a pure two party competition. Unaccountable governments, voter alienation, strategic voting, and governmental instability are shown to be consequences of this institutional mix. These problems may be avoided with reforms towards one or the other basic model.

Club governments versus representative governments

The paper compares the legal rules for private clubs with the constitutions of representative governments. Though both institutions are designed to provide public goods for their members they are organized quite differently. In clubs the power to grant power must not be delegated to the agents, while in representative governments it usually is. The design of representative governments is shown to be inconsistent with a contractarian view of the constitution. A nearly perfect laboratory case for a club government can be found in the example of Switzerland. In this country citizens are absolute sovereigns over their constitution. The Swiss do not have a constitutional court, but have developed instead a system of popular voting rights serving as a substitute for a judicial review by a constitutional court. Though this system does not work perfectly, it has relative advantages compared to a constitutional court which often tends to become a political decisionmaker.

Oil and Vinegar: A Positive Fiscal Theory of the Euro Crisis

The theory of optimal currency areas states that a currency union may succeed if the participating countries have complementary industry structures. If this is not the case a currency union does not, inevitably, have to fail because market forces will induce adjustments of the industry structures that will eventually lead to a successful currency union (see e.g. De Grauwe, 2006). This optimism is, however, not warranted for the euro. The euro has now been in a crisis for more than three years and a self-correcting mechanism leading out of the crisis is not in sight. The reason is that the euro union does not suffer from unadjusted industries, but from unadjusted governments. While industries adjust under the command of the invisible hand of the market in a currency union, this is not necessarily the case for governments. The general point of this paper is that countries with incompatible governments remain inimical in a currency union. They generate externalities and crises which cannot be eliminated as well in a political union.Assume that two countries traditionally cooperate in an economic union. Their governments are financially independent. They “go Dutch”. A currency union, such as the euro union, is different. It opens not only the option of a closer economic cooperation, but it also allows for a joint cash management so that each government has the temptation to live on the other’s costs and hence to generate negative externalities on the other. The governments may be aware of this trap. They conclude a Treaty in order to prevent their mutually destructive behavior. But the Treaty turns out to be non-enforceable and therefore unable to stop the infringements by mutual externalities, this being the essence of the euro crisis. Therefore the governments should withdraw and return to an economic union without externalities.