Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-qdpjg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-20T08:50:36.635Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Dynamic Model of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier  and
Tse-min Lin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In contrast to conventional studies on campaign finance, which focus on the aggregate effect of money on the vote, we propose a more general dynamic model based on temporally disaggregated data. The model is supported by the substantive understanding that at different stages of the campaign process candidates have different goals, and their expenditures should have different effects on the final election outcome. Using Achen's (1986) framework of quasi experiments, the model includes dynamic “assignment equations” and “outcome equations”, which address the problem of nonrandom assignment. A final vote equation is derived in which the coefficients of period-specific incumbent expenditures are constrained by an Almon polynomial. Empirical estimation provides evidence for a three-stage dynamic campaign process.

Type
Research Article
Information
Political Analysis , Volume 6 , 1996 , pp. 37 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Political Methodology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1988. “Explaining Senate Election Outcomes.” American Political Science Review 82: 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramowitz, Alan I. 1991. “Incumbency, Campaign Spending, and the Decline of Competition in U.S. House Elections.” Journal of Politics 53: 34–56.Google Scholar
Achen, Christopher H. 1986. The Statistical Analysis of Quasi-Experiments . Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H. 1980a. Before the Convention: Strategies and Choices in Presidential Nomination Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H. 1980b. “A Dynamic Model of Presidential Nomination Campaigns.” American Political Science Review 74: 651–69.Google Scholar
Alexander, Herbert E. 1972. Financing the 1972 Election. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Allis, Sam. 1992. “Broke but Unbowed.” Time, March 20.Google Scholar
Almon, Shirley. 1965. “The Distributed Lag between Capital Appropriations and Expenditures.” Econometrica 33: 178–96.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen. 1990. “Winning Is Easу, But It Sure Ain't Cheap.” Manuscript.Google Scholar
Bailey, Christopher J. 1990. “The U.S. Congress: An Introductory Bibliography.” American Studies International 28: 32–48.Google Scholar
Banks, Jeffrey S., and Roderick Kiewiet, D. 1989. “Explaining Patterns of Candidate Competition in Congressional Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 33: 997–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1988. Presidential Primaries and the Dynamics of Public Choice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1991. “Instrumental and ’Quasi-Instrumental’ Variables.” American Journal of Political Science 35: 777–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaudry, Ann and Schaeffer, Bob. 1986. Winning Local and State Elections: The Guide to Organizing Your Campaign. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel. 1990. “Testing for a Political Business Cycle with Distributed Lag Models: A Note.” Paper presented at the 1990 Annual Meeting of the Political Methodology Society, Washington University, St. Louis, July 1990.Google Scholar
Bedlington, Anne H., and Powell, Lynda W. 1986. “Money and Elections.” In Research in Micropolitics, edited by Long, Samuel. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Biersack, Robert, Herrnson, Paul, and Wilcox, Clyde. 1993. “Seeds for Success: Early Money in Congressional Elections.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 18: 535–52.Google Scholar
Biersack, Robert, and Wilcox, Clyde. 1990. “Financing National Campaigns: A Research Agenda.” American Politics Quarterly 18: 215–42.Google Scholar
Cheney, Richard B. 1980. “The Law's Impact on Presidential and Congressional Election Campaigns.” In Parties, Interest Groups, and Campaign Finance Laws, edited by Malbin, Michael J. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Chow, Gregory C. 1983. Econometrics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Costantini, Edmond, and King, Joel. 1982. “Checkbook Democrats and Their Copartisans.” American Politics Quarterly 10: 65–92.Google Scholar
Epstein, David and Zemsky, Peter. 1992. “Money Talks: A Signalling Approach to Campaign Finance.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert, and Palfrey, Thomas B. 1992. “The Puzzle of Incumbent Spending in Congressional Elections.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Political Methodology Society, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
FaithAmerica Foundation. 1982. The Citizens Guide to Winning Elections. Scottsdale, AZ: FaithAmerica Press.Google Scholar
Federal Election Commission. 1988. Campaign Guide for Congressional Candidates and Committees. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Feldman, Paul, and Jondrow, James. 1984. “Congressional Elections and Local Federal Spending.” American Journal of Political Science 25: 424–39.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. Jr. 1978. Home Style: House Members in Their Districts. Boston: Little and Brown.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles H. 1993. “Senate Incumbent Visibility over the Election Cycle.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 18: 271–90.Google Scholar
Fritz, Sara, and Morris, Dwight. 1992. Handbook of Campaign Spending: Money in the 1990 Congressional Races. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Glantz, Stanton A., Abramowitz, Alan I., and Burkart, Michael P. 1976. “Election Outcomes: Whose Money Matters?” Journal of Politics 38: 1033–38.Google Scholar
Goldenberg, Edie N. and Traugott, Michael W. 1984. Campaigning for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Goldenberg, Edie N., Traugott, Michael W., and Baumgartner, Frank R. 1986. “Preemptive and Reactive Spending in U.S. House Races.” Political Behavior 8: 3–20.Google Scholar
Green, Donald P., and Krasno, Jonathan S. 1988. “Salvation for the Spendthrift Incumbent: Reestimating the Effects of Campaign Spending in House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 32: 884–907.Google Scholar
Green, Donald P., and Krasno, Jonathan S. 1990. “Rebuttal to Jacobson's ’New Evidence for Old Arguments.” ’Google Scholar
American Journal of Political Science 34: 363–72.Google Scholar
Green, Donald P., Robins, James, and Krasno, Jonathan. 1991. “Using Polls to Estimate the Effects of Campaign Spending by U.S. House Incumbents.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
Grier, Kevin B. 1989. “Campaign Spending and Senate Elections, 1978-84.” Public Choice 63: 201–19.Google Scholar
Guzzetta, S. J. 1981. The Campaign Manual: A Definitive Study of the Modern Political Campaign Process. Alexandria, VA: Campaign Publishing Co. Google Scholar
Herrnson, Paul. 1990. “Campaign Professionalism and Fund-Raising in Congressional Elections.” Journal of Politics 54: 859–71.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1976. “Practical Consequences of Campaign Finance Reform: An Incumbent Protection Act?” Public Policy 24: 1–32.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1978. “The Effects of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review 72: 469–91.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1980. Money in Congressional Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1985. “Money and Votes Reconsidered: Congressional Elections, 1972-1982.” Public Choice 47: 7–62.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1987. The Politics of Congressional Elections. 2d ed. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 1990. “The Effects of Campaign Spending in House Elections: New Evidence for Old Arguments.” American Journal of Political Science 34: 334–62.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. 1984. Econometric Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Jones, Ruth, and Miller, Warren. 1985. “Financing Campaigns: Macro Level Innovation and Micro Level Response.” Western Political Quarterly 38: 187–210.Google Scholar
Judge, George C., Carter Hill, R., Griffiths, William E., Lutkepohl, Helmut, and Lee, Tsoung-Chao. 1988. Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Econometrics. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Kenny, Christopher, and McBurnett, Michael. 1992. “A Dynamic Model of the Effect of Campaign Spending on Congressional Vote Choice.” American Journal of Political Science 36: 923–37.Google Scholar
Kessel, John. 1992. Presidential Campaign Politics. 4th ed. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
Krasno, Jonathan S., Green, Donald P., and Cowden, Jonathan A. 1994. “The Dynamics of Campaign Fundraising in House Elections.” Journal of Politics 56: 459–74.Google Scholar
Magleby, David B., and Nelson, Candice J. 1990. The Money Chase: Congressional Campaign Finance Reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Maisel, Louis Sandy. 1986. From Obscurity to Oblivion: Running in the Congressional Primary. 2d ed. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
Malbin, Michael J. 1984. Money and Politics in the United States: Financing Elections in the 1980s. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
Mann, Thomas E., and Wolfinger, Raymond E. 1980. “Candidates and Parties in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review 74: 617–32.Google Scholar
Ragsdale, Lyn, and Cook, T. E. 1987. “Representatives’ Actions and Challengers’ Reactions: Limits to Candidate Connections in the House.” American Journal of Political Science 31: 45–81.Google Scholar
Salmore, Barbara G., and Salmore, Stephen A. 1989. Candidates, Parties, and Campaigns: Electoral Politics in America. 2d ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Scammon, Richard M., and McGillivray, Alice V., eds. 1991. America Votes. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Silberman, Jonathan, and Yochum, Gilbert. 1978. “The Role of Money in Determining Election Outcomes.” Social Science Quarterly 58: 671–82.Google Scholar
Stewart, Charles III. 1989. “A Sequential Model of U.S. Senate Elections.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 14: 567–601.Google Scholar
Thomas, Scott J. 1989. “Do Incumbent Campaign Expenditures Matter?” Journal of Politics 51: 965–76.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Clyde. 1987. “Timing of Strategic Decisions: Candidacy Decisions in 1982 and 1984.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 12: 565–72.Google Scholar