scholarly journals Do candidates benefit from rejecting PAC contributions? Evidence from a pre-registered candidate evaluation survey experiment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas R. Jenkins ◽  
Michelangelo Geovanny Landgrave
Keyword(s):  
Political Action ◽  
Electoral Politics ◽  
Political Action Committees ◽  
Candidate Evaluation ◽  
Congressional Election ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Election Study ◽  
Party Id ◽  
Campaign Financing ◽  
Evaluation Survey

Despite the public's purported distaste for candidates supported by political action committees (PACs), they remain prominent in American electoral politics, with their total spending exceeding $582 million in the 2020 cycle. Does this dislike of PACs provide an opportunity for candidates to increase their likelihood of (re)election? Using a candidate evaluation survey experiment fielded as part of the 2020 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we investigate how the decision to accept or reject PAC contributions affects candidates' evaluation and voters' willingness to support their election efforts. We find that voters are more likely to vote for, donate to, and trust candidates that reject PAC contributions. Surprisingly we fail to find evidence of moderation by respondent's party ID. Republican and Democratic voters both penalize candidates that accept PAC money. This study is among the first to study how candidates' campaign financing choices influence their evaluation by voters.

Does an EMILY's List Endorsement Predict Electoral Success, or Does EMILY Pick the Winners?

2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (03) ◽  
pp. 503-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca J. Hannagan ◽  
Jamie P. Pimlott ◽  
Levente Littvay
Keyword(s):  
Propensity Score ◽  
Propensity Score Matching ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Linear Models ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Electoral Politics ◽  
Political Action Committees ◽  
Women Candidates ◽  
Electoral Success ◽  
The Impact

AbstractWomen's political action committees (PACs)—those committees founded by women to raise money for women candidates—have been and will likely continue to be an important part of American electoral politics. In this article, we investigate the impact of EMILY's List, because it is the standard bearer of women's PACs and is commonly cited as crucial to women's electoral success. Empirical studies of EMILY's List impact to date have largely assumed causal inference by using traditional linear models. We use a propensity score–matching model to leverage on causality and find that an EMILY endorsement helps some candidates and hurts others. Our findings set the stage for further and more nuanced investigations of when, where, and how EMILY's List can enhance the likelihood of electoral success for women.

Women's and Men's Campaigns for The U.S. House of Representatives, 1972-1982 A Finance Gap?

1985 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 251-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara C. Burrell
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Fund Raising ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
Political Action Committees ◽  
Financial Problem ◽  
Women Candidates ◽  
Disadvantaged Women ◽  
Campaign Financing ◽  
The U.S

The lack of access to equal financial resources with male candidates has been viewed as a major contributing factor in women's inability to gain public office. Analysis of the campaign finance records for election to the U.S. House of Representatives from 1972 to 1982 shows that although on the average women nominees have never raised or spent as much as men, the size of their disparity is curvilinear over these years, and the correlation between gender and campaign financing is weak. Within candidate status groups (incumbents, challengers, and open races) and within the parties female nominees have not been consistently disadvantaged. Women candidates of both parties even have outdistanced their male counterparts on occasion. Data from the 1980 and 1982 elections also indicate that the structure of male and female fund raising is similar in their support from large contributors, political action committees, and the parties. Further, for women challengers, expenditures have a larger impact on votes than for male challengers. The financial problem for women candidates would appear not to lie at the general election stage of the process. Earlier stages, however, may account for women's relative absence from the elected political elite.

scholarly journals Transparency or Deception? How Rejecting PAC Contributions Affects Contribution Patterns

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas R. Jenkins
Keyword(s):  
Political Action ◽  
Campaign Contributions ◽  
Political Action Committees ◽  
Congressional Election ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
Individual Contributions ◽  
Corporate Political Action ◽  
Using Data

A growing trend among Congressional and presidential candidates is to reject campaign contributions from corporate Political Action Committees (PACs). Although positioned as an effort to increase democratic transparency, researchers have yet to examine how these pledges affect contribution patterns. Using data on Democratic candidates in the 2018 Congressional election, I find that although pledging to reject corporate PAC contributions is associated with decreases in contributions from ideological, labor, and business PACs, taking the pledge is also associated with increases in contributions from political PACs and individuals. Increases in individual contributions include small-dollar donations and donations from individuals affiliated ideological and business interests. Additionally, I find that pledging to reject PAC contributions has no electoral benefits. This is the first study to examine the effects of rejecting PAC contributions on contribution patterns, and the first test of the claim that making this pledge will increase small-dollar donations.

Corporations and Labor Unions in Electoral Politics

1976 ◽  
Vol 425 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin M. Epstein
Keyword(s):  
Labor Unions ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Electoral Politics ◽  
Political Action Committees ◽  
The Political ◽  
Federal Regulations ◽  
Special Interests ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Disclosure Requirements ◽  
The Supreme Court

Federal prohibitions of corporate and union con tributions have been motivated by two objectives: to reduce or eliminate domination of the electoral process by business and labor through their aggregated wealth; and to protect stock- holders and union members from having their organizations' funds used for political purposes of which they do not approve. Federal regulations have been largely ineffective in prevent ing corporate and union monies from reaching political candi dates and parties both legally and illegally. Recent develop ments, including passage of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 as amended in 1974, important decisions by the Supreme Court since 1972, and rulings by the Federal Elec tion Commission, have widened the area of legal campaign- related activities in which corporations and labor organizations can engage, particularly through political action committees. The liberalization of previous restrictions, together with more rigorous and effective electoral disclosure requirements, and widespread public suspicion concerning the political activities of "special interests" make it likely that business corporations and labor unions will be quite circumspect in their election involvements during 1976. However, several legal and polit ical issues which could affect corporate and union campaign activities in 1976 and beyond remain unresolved.

scholarly journals Changes in perceptions of media bias

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 205316802098744
Author(s):  
Kirby Goidel ◽  
Nicholas T. Davis ◽  
Spencer Goidel
Keyword(s):  
Attitude Change ◽  
Media Bias ◽  
Congressional Election ◽  
Election Study ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Change Perceptions ◽  
Individual Perceptions ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
The Media

In this paper, we utilize a module from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study to explore how individual perceptions of media bias changed over the course of the 2016 presidential campaign. While previous literature has documented the role of partisan affiliation in perceptions of bias, we know considerably less about how these perceptions change during a presidential election. Consistent with existing theories of attitude change, perceptions of bias polarize with strong Democrats moving toward believing the media were biased against Hillary Clinton (and in favor of Donald Trump) and independent-leaning Republicans moving toward believing the media were biased against Donald Trump. At the end of the 2016 election, more individuals believed the media were biased against their side. These effects were moderated by how much attention individuals paid to the campaign.

The Effects of Interest Groups' Ideology on Their PAC and Lobbying Expenditures

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy McKay
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Political Action Committees ◽  
Unanswered Question ◽  
Group Type ◽  
Congressional Campaigns ◽  
Extreme Groups

While the literature on political action committees' (PACs) contributions to congressional campaigns is substantial, one key variable has been missing: the ideology of the PAC. Such a measure is needed to evaluate a normatively important yet unanswered question: to what extent do PACs give to candidates with whom they agree ideologically, as opposed to candidates they may want to influence after the election? This study shows that many interest groups' preferences for an electoral strategy or an access strategy can be predicted by their left-right ideology and their level of ideological extremism. The analysis finds that more ideologically extreme groups and more liberal groups spend more money on PAC contributions relative to lobbying. Further, groups' underlying left-right ideology is also highly predictive of their allocation of PAC contributions between the two parties—even controlling for group type.

scholarly journals Climate Change in Your Backyard: When Climate is Proximate, People Become Activists

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Sparks
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
The World ◽  
Change Impact ◽  
Climate Disasters ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Climate Mitigation Policies

Scientific warnings about climate change continue as climate disasters strike all around the world. There is increasing public support for climate mitigation policies, and major mass protests shed light on the issue. How does climate change impact increase climate activism? I build on a conventional understanding of activism by adding the insight of construal level theory. When climate change is experienced more directly, people are more likely to act because they care more and can link concern to specific actions. Among a sample of Californians (MTurk; n = 604) as climate was perceived as more proximate, respondents were more likely to take action. A survey-experiment conducted using a US sample (MTurk; n = 609) demonstrated that as issues become more psychologically proximate, respondents were more likely to take political action. These results suggest that organizers can activate proximity to mobilize supporters.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document