Default Article

Political Spending: Civic Engagement is Not a Threat to Democracy

January 1, 2018  •  By IFS Staff  •    •  

The First Amendment guarantees every American freedom of speech. That freedom includes the right to spend money on speech. Without money, a political group cannot buy ads, print fliers, organize protests, or hire staff. Short of shouting one’s opinions on a street corner, it takes money to spread a message. Recognizing this relationship, the Supreme Court has long prohibited the…

Why is there So Little Money in U.S. Politics?

June 10, 2002   •  By IFS staff   •  ,

Thirty years ago, Gordon Tullock posed a provocative puzzle: considering the value of public policies at stake and the reputed in°uence of campaign contributions in ...

The Effect of War Chests on Challenger Entry in U.S. House Elections

October 1, 2001   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

In this article, Jay Goodliffe challenges conventional wisdom on the effect of war chests in U.S. House elections. As many "reformers" suggest that war ...

It’s the Spending, Stupid: Understanding Campaign Finance in the Big-Government Era

July 1, 2001   •  By Matt Nese   •  ,

Proponents of new restrictions on campaign finance often argue that the United States spends too much money on campaigns and elections. That proposition is difficult to sustain ...

The Distribution of Campaign Spending Benefits across Groups

March 1, 2001   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

Scholarly attention to congressional campaign spending has focused primarily on the benefits candidates receive from that spending, from challenger deterrence to election victory to ...

Who’s Buying Campaign Finance ‘Reform’?

January 1, 2001   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

The campaign finance reform ‘campaign’ is controlled and financed by liberal Democrats: wealthy soft money donors to the Democratic party and candidates, liberal foundations and Democratic ...

Campaign Finance in U.S. House Primary and General Elections

January 1, 2001   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

This chapter explores the relationship between U.S. House primary and general elections, focusing specifically on campaign finance. In the chapter, we assess how competitiveness in primaries ...

Why Do Political Action Committees Give Money to Candidates? Campaign Contributions, Policy Choices, and Election Outcomes

October 2, 2000   •  By IFS staff   •  ,

Rational political action committees (PACs) will give campaign contributions to candidates for two main reasons. Either the contributions are intended to influence the actions taken ...

A Simple Explanation for Why Campaign Expenditures are Increasing: the Government is Getting Bigger

October 1, 2000   •  By Luke Wachob   •  ,

Federal campaign spending for all candidates running for the House and the Senate has risen by 180 in real terms from 1976 to 1994, ...

PACs and Parties

October 1, 2000   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

The relationships between political action committees and political parties are at once symbiotic and parasitic. Both parties work hard to cultivate PACs and secure their money, ...

Are PAC Contributions and Lobbying Linked? New Evidence from the 1995 Lobby Disclosure Act

August 1, 2000   •  By IFS staff   •  , ,

House and Senate candidates raise approximately $200 million in campaign contributions from political action committees each election cycle. The lion’s share of this money goes ...

Load more