Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evidence reveals federal contracts favor Swing and Core states in election cycles, suggesting electoral motives.
We document presidential particularism in the allocation of U.S. federal government contracts. Firms in “Swing” and “Core” states receive disproportionately higher federal contracts during election cycles. Contracts peak in reelection years for incumbent presidents suggesting electoral and partisan motives. Awards to “Core” states fall relative to “Hostile” states in election years of the presidents’ second terms. Government agencies engage more aggressively in particularism when aligned with the president’s party. Particularism disappeared during the Trump presidency, with Hostile-state firms awarded more contracts. Market participants, who are slow to recognize the relationship between particularism and corporate earning, underreact to this phenomenon.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: