Rich state, poor state, red state, blue state: what's the matter with Connecticut? *.(Column)

From: Quarterly Journal of Political Science | Date: November 1, 2007| Author: Bafumi, Joseph; Gelman, Andrew; Park, David; Shor, Boris | Copyright information

ABSTRACT

For decades, the Democrats have been viewed as the party of the poor, with the Republicans representing the rich. Recent presidential elections, however, have shown a reverse pattern, with Democrats performing well in the richer blue states in the northeast and coasts, and Republicans dominating in the red states in the middle of the country and the south. Through multilevel modeling of individual-level survey data and county- and state-level demographic and ele...

Read all of this article with a FREE trial to HighBeam Research

Related newspaper, magazine, and journal articles from HighBeam Research

Income up in 44 states
Chicago Sun-Times ; WASHINGTON Personal income rose in 44 states during the first three months of 1987, with corn subsidy payments making Iowa the leader with a 9.7 percent increase, the Commerce Department said Monday. Income in Illinois rose 2.3 percent; in Indiana, 2.7 percent and in Wisconsin 1.3 percent.
Economic inequality through the prisms of income and consumption: between 1981 and 2001, economic inequality among groups in the general population has increased in the United States; two measures of income and consumption are used to gauge relative well-being.
Monthly Labor Review ; ... and not from changes in permanent income. (9) This may be good news because permanent income is a better measure of long-term well-being than transitory income. But it may be bad news if researchers have interpreted transitory changes as permanent ...
Working on welfare Wisconsin's welfare plan waits in shadow of likely Clinton veto; The GOP plan According to a summary provided by Congressional Quarterly, these are some of the major provisions of the Republican welfare bill that President Clinton plans to veto: Funding: The legislation would save $58 billion over the next seven years. Block grants: Aid to Families with Dependent Children, the program in which the federal government now automatically provides aid to low-income women and children who meet certain criteria, would be eliminated. Instead, states would be given lump-sum payments called block grants and could craft their own programs with their own eligibility requirements. Discouraging welfare babies: States that reduce out-of-wedlock births would receive financial bonuses from the federal government. States would be discouraged from providing benefits to children born to welfare recipients. States would be allowed to deny benefits to unwed parents who are 17 or under. Time limits: Federal welfare benefits generally would be limited to five years over the lifetime of any adult. Work requirements: Adults receiving welfare benefits generally would be required to begin working within two years. States are supposed to place at least 50% of their welfare caseload in jobs by 2002. Disabled children: It would be more difficult for children to be considered disabled to qualify for Supplemental Security Income, the program that provides cash benefits to the disabled, blind and low-income elderly. Drug abuse: Drug addiction and alcoholism no longer would be considered disabilities under the SSI program. Child support: States must suspend the driver's licenses of those who fail to pay required child support. A national registry would be established to track deadbeat parents. Immigrants: Legal immigrants who already live in the U.S. would be ineligible for SSI and food stamps. New legal immigrants would be denied most federal social services for five years after their arrival. Child care: States would receive block grants to help welfare recipients find child care. Child nutrition: Increases in spending on child nutrition would be $3.9 billion less than previous projections over seven years. Up to seven states could run the school breakfast and lunch programs through a block grant rather than the current federal program. Food stamps: Increases in spending on food stamps would be curtailed. Able-bodied, childless recipients between ages 18 and 50 would be required to work to receive the benefits.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ; As Wisconsin moves forward on plans to overhaul its welfare system, officials will be keeping their eyes on what happens in Washington. Congress approved sweeping legislation last month that would trim welfare spending, eliminate the guarantee of aid for poor mothers and children and turn over to
Income data quality issues in the CPS: the Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey measures income and poverty in the United States; a close look into the questionnaire design, data collection and preparation, and postcollection data processing suggests areas for improvement and issues for future research.(Current Population Survey)
Monthly Labor Review ; How well does the official data source measure income and depict poverty in the United States? The current official poverty statistics published by the Census Bureau are based on money income data collected on the Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC) to the Current Population Survey (CPS).
Fed: Differences in income across states and territories
AAP General News (Australia) ; AAP General News (Australia) 07-04-2000 Fed: Differences in income across states and territories CANBERRA, July 4 AAP - Factbox of differing income ...
State lawsuits over trademark royalty income.(IN THE STATES)(Brief Article)
The Kiplinger Letter ; More states will sue companies using a common tax loophole: Trademark holding companies set up outside a firm's home state in order to earn a tax deduction for royalty payments. In Del. and Nev., royalty income is tax free. The Supreme Court let stand a 1993 verdict requiring a Toys R Us subsidiary
ARAB STATES: FORECAST OF INCOME FROM OIL EXPORTS TO END OF 2005.
IPR Strategic Business Information Database ; A-Sharq newspaper quoted forecasts of income to Arab countries from oil exports in 2005 as published in late October 2005 in a report by the International Monetary Agency. By the end of 2005, it is estimated that this income will reach $400 billion. The price of a barrel of oil is estimated to
GULF STATES: ESTIMATE OF INCOME FROM OIL EXPORTS IN 2006.
IPR Strategic Business Information Database ; Al-Wasat newspaper quoted Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Abd al-Hussein Mirza who estimated in early April 2006 that the income for Gulf States from oil exports in 2006 will reach $270 billion, including $162 billion for Saudi Arabian oil exports. He estimated that income for OPEC member states in 2006
GULF STATES: SAUDI ARABIA, KUWAIT AND UAE ESTIMATED ON INCOME FROM OIL EXPORTS TO 2020.(Shal Economic Consulting Company, Jasim a-Sa'adon)(Brief Article)
IPR Strategic Business Information Database ; Al-Ayam newspaper quoted President of the Shal Economic Consulting Company, Jasim a-Sa'adon, who estimated in mid-June 2004 that the government of Kuwait will invest $40 billion in development of its oil sector by the year 2020. He estimated that most of this sum will come from national income from
GULF STATES: FORECAST OF INCOME FROM SALE OF OIL DURING 2004.(Brief Article)
IPR Strategic Business Information Database ; Al-Khaleej newspaper quoted forecasts on Gulf States national income from oil sales during 2004 as published in November 2004 by the Industrial Development Bank. By the end of 2004 this income will reach $204 billion, up 46% from $140 billion in 2003. These forecasts are based on an average rise in