Maintaining redistribution despite austerity: Spatial diversity in US local government expenditures 2007–2017

Neither fiscal federalism nor austerity theory adequately explain shifts in US local government expenditure after the Great Recession. We assess spatial differences in local government expenditure composition using finance data for all local governments in the USA from 2007 to 2017. Overall, there was considerable stability in local expenditure patterns, despite pressures generated by the Great Recession. State decentralization, state aid, politics, local capacity, and need all affect local expenditure patterns. Panel regressions of education, social, and allocational expenditures show decentralization is associated with more redistributive expenditure at the local level—not less, as fiscal federalism and austerity theory claim. However, decentralization of educational expenditure is associated with less local educational expenditure. State aid, by contrast, has a complementary effect on local education expenditure. Education spending dropped and then recovered, but state educational aid was found to privilege suburbs. Social expenditure grew during the Great Recession as most cities and counties maintained social welfare expenditures even in the face of fiscal constraints. Overall state aid for social welfare relieved local social expenditure, but it had a complementary effect on social welfare spending in states with historically high social welfare commitments (NY, CA, the Midwest). Localities in the Midwest faced greater fiscal stress, as state aid for social welfare plummeted in these states during the Great Recession. Despite the austerity faced by Midwestern counties, they maintained redistributive expenditure levels. US local governments are not austerity machines. They practice pragmatic municipalism—meeting needs despite limited fiscal resources.