Disaster relief helps the incumbent, research shows

Nov 01, 2012
Disaster relief helps the incumbent, research shows
During the storm, partially submerged cars were abandoned by their owners in a parking lot in Oyster Bay on Long Island in New York.

(Phys.org)—A 2009 study from the Stanford Graduate School of Business and Loyola Marymount University suggests President Obama may get a bump in the polls from Superstorm Sandy.

How might Superstorm Sandy affect the 2012 presidential election? Political analysts are speculating about the impact of the storm on early voting and the candidates' abilities to campaign in battleground states.

But research by  Neil Malhotra, an associate professor of political economy at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, and economist Andrew Healy of Loyola Marymount University suggests a different kind of effect. Their findings, published in the American Political Science Review in 2009, show that voters reward presidents for delivering relief spending after a disaster strikes.

Examining data from 1988-2004, Healy and Malhotra found that a doubling of relief payments before an election on average boosts the incumbent's vote share by about half a percentage point, potentially enough to swing a very close election. The images of President Obama visiting the (FEMA) and pledging federal disaster aid to affected communities therefore may help him at the ballot box next week, Malhotra said.

But the tendency of voters to be influenced by disaster payments may not be optimal for the country.

Healy and Malhotra found that money the government spends on preparing for disaster provides no boost for the incumbent president. This creates incentives for presidents to deliver relief spending, rather than preparing for before they take place.

Since 1988, the amount of money the United States spends on has increased 13 times while the amount of spending on has been flat. The researchers also found evidence to support Benjamin Franklin's adage: "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." They estimated that $1 in preparedness spending was worth $15 in relief payments in preventing future disasters.

While President Obama may benefit from a visible and swift response to Superstorm Sandy, voters' willingness to reward relief over preparedness efforts costs the United States billions of dollars a year, the researchers found.

Explore further: When rulers can't understand the ruled

More information: myweb.lmu.edu/ahealy/papers/he… ly_malhotra_2009.pdf

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Study finds link between political corruption and FEMA money

Dec 11, 2008

Where natural disasters strike, political corruption is soon to follow, say the authors of a study in the Journal of Law and Economics. But it's not the wind and rain that turns good folks bad; it's the money that floods ...

Recommended for you

Study examines use of GIS in policing

19 minutes ago

Police agencies are using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for mapping crime, identifying crime "hot spots," assigning officers, and profiling offenders, but little research has been done about the effectiveness of the ...

When rulers can't understand the ruled

17 hours ago

Johns Hopkins University political scientists wanted to know if America's unelected officials have enough in common with the people they govern to understand them.

When casualties increased, war coverage became more negative

21 hours ago

As the number of U.S. casualties rose in Afghanistan, reporters filed more stories about the conflict and those articles grew increasingly negative about both the war effort and the military, according to a Penn State researcher. ...

User comments : 0