The emergence of the “abundance” movement has raised central questions around state capacity, namely the state’s ability to deliver services to citizens effectively. A central claim is that too much process, especially in blue states, has diminished state capacity and hollowed out government. Yet no systematic examination of complex processes across states and across time exists; measuring such differences is challenging, involving an immense number of statutory and regulatory materials. We here present the first empirical assessment of reporting requirements, a hallmark of administrative agencies, through an intensive survey of all fifty state codes, as well as reform proposals based on unique collaborations with California’s Government Operations Agency, the Maryland Governor’s Office, and the New York Governor’s Office. First, drawing on these state partnerships to validate and utilize our AI statutory research tool, we comprehensively search over 500 million words of state statutes and document the prevalence of reporting mandates nationwide. Second, consistent with abundance proponents, we show that reporting requirements are more extensive in more Democratic jurisdictions. Partisanship, however, explains only a small part of the variation in reporting; the reporting thicket exists everywhere. Third, we demonstrate sharp growth over time. California’s requirements increased roughly 400% from 2000 to 2025, in sharp contrast to civil service levels. Put differently, state employees are asked to do more with no comparable increase in civil service levels. Fourth, the explosion of process is accompanied by noncompliance. Approximately 30% of California’s ongoing, recurring reports may have never been filed. Based on novel internal surveys of agencies about each reporting requirement, four Maryland agencies recommended that nearly 20% of their combined reporting requirements should be removed. Aspirational transparency is practical incapacity. Fifth, we offer estimates for what is so often neglected in legislative mandates for reporting: the costs to produce such reports. Based on previously reported federal data, costs could exceed $1B annually. Based on novel surveys fielded in California and Maryland, we document dramatic variability in the costs of each report, with some being very cheap and others exorbitant—one report consumes 3,500 staff hours and over $870,000 to produce. Our evidence places our understanding and ability to reform the reporting thicket on more solid ground. Last, we discuss theoretical implications, especially on the need for abundance theorists to account for trade-offs, and offer model reforms to enable jurisdictions to tame reporting obligations and ensure that they improve, rather than incapacitate, public administration.

Read More