{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.043704474505723206, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007284079084287201, 'mean_word_length': 5.971014492753623, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Public Choice Economics: Where is there Consensus?

Are public choice scholars' conclusions accepted by rank–and–file economists and political scientists? If not, why not? To answer these questions we use survey results to compare the conclusions of self–identified public choice scholars with those in the adjacent disciplines of economics and political science. We examine thirty–five propositions in seven areas: (1) assumptions about political actors; (2) normative beliefs about government and voting; (3) elections and economic performance; (4) parties, platforms, voting and preferences; (5) government's purposes and growth; (6) individual behavior–voting–with–feet and free riding; and (7) government and the market. We conclude that, although there is consensus on many of the issues, there is substantial remaining disagreement on many questions that appears to be tied to the competing presuppositions of scholars in economics and political science.