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: Physicists create tool to foresee language destruction impact and thus prevent it

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

Affirmative action elicits bias in pro-equality Caucasians

Jul 25, 2014

New research from Simon Fraser University's Beedie School of Business indicates that bias towards the effects of affirmative action exists in not only people opposed to it, but also in those who strongly endorse equality.

Election surprises tend to erode trust in government

Jul 24, 2014

When asked who is going to win an election, people tend to predict their own candidate will come out on top. When that doesn't happen, according to a new study from the University of Georgia, these "surprised losers" often ...

Awarded a Pell Grant? Better double-check

Jul 23, 2014

(AP)—Potentially tens of thousands of students awarded a Pell Grant or other need-based federal aid for the coming school year could find it taken away because of a mistake in filling out the form.

User comments : 0