Volume Number


Issue Number



While several studies have questioned the value of public policies produced during periods of divided government, this analysis will examine the potentially positive effects of divided partisan control on federal criminal justice spending policies necessitating greater negotiating and consensual policymaking between the branches. It suggests that an increase in partisan veto players will reduce the discretionary authority of the political branches by minimizing statutory permissiveness through the decrease in non-formulaic monies. Minimizing statutory permissiveness thereby facilitates more formulaic spending and hence greater genuine checks and balances between the branches. Thus, divided government with more unaligned institutional veto players tends to generate less non-formulaic disbursements of federal grants than unified government and such distributive patterns are inclined to be less partisan and particularistic.

Access-controlled Item

If download is prevented click here for purchase options.