EXAMINING FISCAL IDENTITY: AN INTERSECTIONAL ANALYSIS OF MAYORAL BACKGROUNDS AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION IN U.S. CITIES

Abstract

The 2024 U.S. presidential election reignited the national conversation on pervasive identity-based stereotypes in voter behavior, highlighting how heuristics deeply shape perceptions of political candidates. This paper questions how a mayor’s gender, party, and professional background influence municipal budget compositions, and how, if at all, that relationship validates common stereotypes. To study this, I created a proprietary dataset of 96 U.S. cities, their 2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports, and mayoral identity data. I manually coded spending into four primary categories (social welfare, public safety, economic development, and general government) and compared allocations across identity variables. I found that gender and occupational backgrounds produce more similar allocations than party. Female mayors outspend male counterparts in nearly every category; lawyers allocated most to development and least to welfare; and women with business backgrounds prioritize both welfare and development spending, destabilizing gendered and professional stereotypes. These findings show correlation, not causation. Several uncontrolled variables, like inherited commitments and mayoral power, inhibited this study's ability to attribute patterns directly to mayoral identity. As a result, this study invites the continuation of research on this topic with a larger sample and stronger controls for budget authority. However, despite constraints, patterns in the data did still emerge, suggesting that an officeholder's identity can significantly affect municipal spending outcomes.