Search

This paper focuses on the effects of political ideology and party affiliation on support for more government spending on environmental protection. Pooled‐sample results show that Liberals (Democrats) are more likely to support higher government spending on environmental protection than Moderates (Independents), who, in turn, are more likely to support higher spending levels than Conservatives (Republicans). The results persist even when we control for respondents' opinions concerning whether the federal government, in general, does too little or too much. When stratifying by party, ideological divisions generally narrow, while stratifying by ideology leads to slightly wider divisions between Democrats and Republicans. Together, these results suggest that when Liberals and Conservatives form opinions about government spending on the environment, party affiliation, to some degree, dampens the effects of ideology. Between 2014 and 2018 the probability of supporting more environmental spending increased, albeit slightly, for all ideologies and parties, but more so for Liberals and Democrats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. The effects of religiosity and sociodemographic characteristics on support for same-sex marriage (SSM) are estimated. Methods. An ordered probability model with ordinal endogenous treatment is estimated. Treatment effects of religiosity and marginal effects of other covariates are calculated. Results. Religiosity reduces the likelihood of SSM support. This impact can be attenuated by educational achievement, Democratic Party affiliation, higher incomes, and greater contact with gays and lesbians. The importance of religion has no differential impact on the marginal effects of other covariates. Conclusions. We expect the litigation of cases in which gay married couples allege victimization from some form of discrimination, which, in turn, will be defended on the grounds of religious freedom. Religious freedom supporters will come from the intrinsically religious, evangelicals, strong Republicans, and African Americans; same-sex couples will draw support from those who are more educated, strongly Democratic, and at the higher end of the income distribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eliminating or reducing the federal charitable deduction can have serious impacts on the level of charitable donations. Tax price elasticity estimates from a multivariate sample selection model indicate that changing the deduction to a 12% tax credit would have reduced individual donations in 2012 by 18.9% if applied to itemizing taxpayers and by 10.5% if extended to nonitemizers. Elimination of the deduction would have led to a 35% reduction in individual charitable donations. Even if coupled with cuts in marginal tax rates, eliminating the charitable deduction will still likely result in substantial reductions given the inelastic income elasticities of charitable donations. The estimates justify the ardent opposition of many in the nonprofit sector to the more radical proposals for changing the tax treatment of charitable contributions. ( JEL D34, C34) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]