While PAC spending has grown significantly in elections, the relationship between district income levels and PAC contributions is unclear. The authors analyzed this relationship through three linear regression models comparing mean household income to PAC spending at the congressional district level from 2006-2012. The first model found a weak positive correlation, but it was not statistically significant. The second model, adjusted for year-to-year differences, also produced a positive correlation that was not statistically significant. The third model, which further adjusted for district differences, showed the strongest positive correlation but with a large margin of error, preventing conclusions. Overall, the analysis did not find clear evidence that lower-income districts receive more PAC funds to compensate for smaller donor bases as hypothesized.
Progress Now Arizona conducted an online poll in April 2018 to quantify themes from qualitative research, including Arizonans' negative views of politics. Key findings include:
- Voters see corporations and lobbyists as symbols of problems and support taxing corporations more.
- Populist messages rejecting help for the powerful resonate more than overtly progressive ones.
- Voters want honest leaders who provide facts over spin.
However, centrist messages also test well. Some theories did not pan out, and voters prioritize candidate qualities like honesty over struggling financially or personal attributes. This non-probability survey of 814 adults is biased towards more engaged online voters.
This document discusses strategies for moving beyond "horse race" reporting of political campaigns. It defines horse race reporting as focusing on who is winning/losing polls rather than substantive policy issues. The document provides tips for local political reporting, such as fact-checking candidates' resumes and spending claims. It also discusses following the money in campaigns by examining donors and how they may influence politicians. The document emphasizes the importance of local political reporting for accountability and engaged voters.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) dramatically increased its online fundraising between 2010 and 2012, allowing it to raise substantially more money than its Republican counterpart, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). In 2012, the DCCC raised $49.3 million online, accounting for one-third of its total revenue, compared to just 5-9% in previous cycles. This included several "million-dollar days" of online fundraising. In contrast, the NRCC declined to disclose its online fundraising totals. However, records showed the DCCC raised more than three times as much in small donations. While the NRCC plans to increase its digital staff and prioritize online fundraising, Democrats expect to maintain their online fundraising advantage in 2014
This document provides guidance on developing a winning campaign plan in 3 parts:
1. It outlines the basic components that should be included in any campaign plan such as an analysis of the district, candidate, issues, and budget.
2. It discusses how to analyze the district through understanding past election results and the current political environment.
3. It emphasizes the importance of developing strategies for voter contact, volunteer coordination, fundraising, and getting out the vote. Having a clear, written plan is presented as key to winning local elections.
The document discusses campaign spending in the 2012 US presidential election. It notes that conservative groups spent over $1.3 billion supporting Mitt Romney and other Republicans through Super PACs. However, this massive spending appeared ineffective, as Barack Obama was reelected with a commanding Electoral College victory. While negative ads may have had some impact, Obama's strong grassroots organization and get-out-the-vote efforts in swing states were likely more important factors in his victories. Money alone cannot buy an election; enthusiasm and commitment on the ground are also crucial to success.
5 Shocking Truths About Human Trafficking in AmericaInstant Checkmate
Did you know the Super Bowl is the single largest human trafficking event in the United States? Human trafficking isn't a foreign problem — and it's a massive issue. Instant Checkmate compiled 5 shocking truths you have to see to believe.
If you or someone you know may be a victim of human trafficking, contact the National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC) hotline at 1-888-373-7888 or text HELP or INFO to BeFree (233733).
For more information about human trafficking, read more here: https://www.instantcheckmate.com/crimewire/10-shocking-truths-about-human-trafficking-in-america/
The new normal in the United States is not anything like it was just a few years ago. Fear and anxiety have replaced confidence and hope when it comes to the economy, and the effects have been felt from the family den to the White House. Optimism is out and pessimism is in, with Americans questioning the future of health care, education, jobs and the political direction of the country. In February 2010, Euro RSCG Worldwide PR and Euro RSCG Life, the public relations arm and the health-focused communications network of Euro RSCG Worldwide, a leading integrated marketing communications agency, commissioned two surveys to try to gauge the mood of Americans on these hot-button issues and others. One survey questioned people nationwide; the other polled residents of Connecticut. Research partners MicroDialogue deployed the two surveys, with each questioning a random and representative sample of 386 people age 18 and older, then analyzed the data. The resultant “U.S. Mind and Mood” white paper provides a series of snapshots of a nation living in a precarious present.
- April 2010
Progress Now Arizona conducted an online poll in April 2018 to quantify themes from qualitative research, including Arizonans' negative views of politics. Key findings include:
- Voters see corporations and lobbyists as symbols of problems and support taxing corporations more.
- Populist messages rejecting help for the powerful resonate more than overtly progressive ones.
- Voters want honest leaders who provide facts over spin.
However, centrist messages also test well. Some theories did not pan out, and voters prioritize candidate qualities like honesty over struggling financially or personal attributes. This non-probability survey of 814 adults is biased towards more engaged online voters.
This document discusses strategies for moving beyond "horse race" reporting of political campaigns. It defines horse race reporting as focusing on who is winning/losing polls rather than substantive policy issues. The document provides tips for local political reporting, such as fact-checking candidates' resumes and spending claims. It also discusses following the money in campaigns by examining donors and how they may influence politicians. The document emphasizes the importance of local political reporting for accountability and engaged voters.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) dramatically increased its online fundraising between 2010 and 2012, allowing it to raise substantially more money than its Republican counterpart, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). In 2012, the DCCC raised $49.3 million online, accounting for one-third of its total revenue, compared to just 5-9% in previous cycles. This included several "million-dollar days" of online fundraising. In contrast, the NRCC declined to disclose its online fundraising totals. However, records showed the DCCC raised more than three times as much in small donations. While the NRCC plans to increase its digital staff and prioritize online fundraising, Democrats expect to maintain their online fundraising advantage in 2014
This document provides guidance on developing a winning campaign plan in 3 parts:
1. It outlines the basic components that should be included in any campaign plan such as an analysis of the district, candidate, issues, and budget.
2. It discusses how to analyze the district through understanding past election results and the current political environment.
3. It emphasizes the importance of developing strategies for voter contact, volunteer coordination, fundraising, and getting out the vote. Having a clear, written plan is presented as key to winning local elections.
The document discusses campaign spending in the 2012 US presidential election. It notes that conservative groups spent over $1.3 billion supporting Mitt Romney and other Republicans through Super PACs. However, this massive spending appeared ineffective, as Barack Obama was reelected with a commanding Electoral College victory. While negative ads may have had some impact, Obama's strong grassroots organization and get-out-the-vote efforts in swing states were likely more important factors in his victories. Money alone cannot buy an election; enthusiasm and commitment on the ground are also crucial to success.
5 Shocking Truths About Human Trafficking in AmericaInstant Checkmate
Did you know the Super Bowl is the single largest human trafficking event in the United States? Human trafficking isn't a foreign problem — and it's a massive issue. Instant Checkmate compiled 5 shocking truths you have to see to believe.
If you or someone you know may be a victim of human trafficking, contact the National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC) hotline at 1-888-373-7888 or text HELP or INFO to BeFree (233733).
For more information about human trafficking, read more here: https://www.instantcheckmate.com/crimewire/10-shocking-truths-about-human-trafficking-in-america/
The new normal in the United States is not anything like it was just a few years ago. Fear and anxiety have replaced confidence and hope when it comes to the economy, and the effects have been felt from the family den to the White House. Optimism is out and pessimism is in, with Americans questioning the future of health care, education, jobs and the political direction of the country. In February 2010, Euro RSCG Worldwide PR and Euro RSCG Life, the public relations arm and the health-focused communications network of Euro RSCG Worldwide, a leading integrated marketing communications agency, commissioned two surveys to try to gauge the mood of Americans on these hot-button issues and others. One survey questioned people nationwide; the other polled residents of Connecticut. Research partners MicroDialogue deployed the two surveys, with each questioning a random and representative sample of 386 people age 18 and older, then analyzed the data. The resultant “U.S. Mind and Mood” white paper provides a series of snapshots of a nation living in a precarious present.
- April 2010
The document discusses fraud risks faced by non-profit organizations, noting that fraud accounts for estimated losses of $40 billion annually in the non-profit sector. It outlines common types of fraud such as skimming donations, creating fraudulent tax losses, and overstating expenses. The document also provides recommendations for non-profits to implement controls to prevent fraud, such as requiring two signatures on checks and having bank statements sent directly to someone other than the treasurer.
This document discusses the ethics of gambling and summarizes a research probe on the topic. It begins by providing context on gambling as a controversial leisure activity and discusses how some destinations have legalized gambling for economic benefits. It then summarizes Amir Shani's argument that tourism scholarship has focused on cost-benefit analyses and resident attitudes but neglected important philosophical questions about the ethics of gambling. The responses in the probe suggest taking a pragmatic approach to minimize gambling's negative externalities and unethical expressions.
This document provides an industry analysis of the U.S. nonprofit news sector, with a focus on web-based startups. It includes case studies of four nonprofit news organizations: NPR, Chicago Public Media, New America Foundation, and The Sapling Foundation (TED). The nonprofit news industry faces challenges including an overreliance on unreliable grants and pressures not to develop sustainable business models. However, nonprofit news outlets are attempting to fill coverage gaps left by for-profit media, particularly in investigative reporting and coverage of local issues. The case study of NPR highlights how it has adapted to changes in media consumption through expanding its digital offerings and mobile apps, though concerns remain about the impact of new car technologies on commuter listeners
The document discusses lessons learned from Barack Obama's successful use of new media in his 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns. It outlines how Obama was able to raise over $550 million online through leveraging new media as "impulse candy" and a "greeter" to efficiently reach niche audiences. It also discusses how to streamline paths to action, leverage urgency and special moments, continuously test and improve, and share content to encourage grassroots participation.
Presentation given to my class as part of my studies for a Masters Degree in Public Affairs and Political Communication. The presentation looks at the use of voter data and the Get Out The Vote (GOTV) program run by the Obama Campaign and the Democratic Party.
EPIP/NCRP Webinar | Supersized Imbalance: Post-2014 Election, What Foundation...EPIPNational
Philanthropy cannot work in a silo or vacuum; philanthropy and the communities it serves are influenced by policy and elections. At the start of 2015, state legislatures will be in full swing with plenty of interesting policy issues on the table. For this webinar, we were joined by experts who demonstrated effective tools for understanding contemporary policy issues. We also heared from a foundation that is using data-centric tools to bolster their agenda.
Speakers:
- Christine Reeves, Senior Field Associate, National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy & Board Member, EPIP (Moderator)
- Edwin Bender, Executive Director, National Institute on Money in State Politics
- Bert Brandenberg, Executive Director, Justice at Stake
- Tara Malloy, Senior Counsel, Campaign Legal Center
- Daniel Stid, Director of the Madison Initiative, William & Flora Hewlett Foundation
Research shows that while 52.4% of those in poverty in the USA are people of color, only 16.5% of nonprofits are led by people of color, and only 3% of foundation funding goes toward organizations that are led by people of color. This presentation provides three recommendations of how AmeriCorps can counter this bias: (1) reaching out to Black and Latino led Faith-based organizations (2) requiring grantees provide diversity profiles (3) Revising funding priorities.
The document discusses the effectiveness of political attack ads and negative campaigning. It finds that:
1) Attack ads are not consistently effective at winning votes or lowering voter turnout according to meta-analyses of over 100 studies.
2) They are more effective at increasing awareness and knowledge of campaigns but can lower feelings of political efficacy and trust.
3) Negative ads are only demobilizing if voters have already chosen a candidate and then are exposed to attacks on that candidate later in the campaign. Timing is important for negative ads to be effective.
This document discusses increasing fundraising efficiency through donor segmentation. It suggests that while psychographic criteria are often used to segment donors, fundraisers typically only have access to socio-demographic data. The authors conducted a study in Austria to determine how individuals of different ages, genders, and social classes donate in terms of amount, frequency, organizations supported, and form of donation. They identified three basic conditions under which people are more likely to donate: 1) when the purpose pertains to their sphere, 2) when they may benefit from the organization's services, and 3) when the donation does not represent a high expense or effort. These conditions are proposed as dimensions for segmenting and targeting donors using socio-demographic data to
This presentation explains the reason behind the success of Obama in winning the second term.It talks about how social media can be fully utilized to promote a product or a service.
Donald Trump's use of social media in the 2016 US Presidential election transformed political campaigning into a "real time" endeavor. Through his core staff of 85 compared to Hillary Clinton's 600+, Trump drove engagement through platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit. Despite being outspent, Trump's message resonated more. Now, events have real-time impacts as crowdsourced activism and social media backlash can influence corporate decisions and consumer behavior within hours. Real-time data analytics and social physics modeling will continue shaping outcomes in business and politics.
3 ways charitable giving is likely to change in 2019 - Adam GantAdam Gant
Adam Gant discusses 3 ways charitable giving is likely to change in 2019 in this in-depth presentational blog. For more information, please visit AdamGant.org!
The document discusses voter apathy and low voter turnout in Texas, particularly in Dallas and Tarrant counties. It notes that turnout is lowest for local elections. The document analyzes potential causes of low turnout like voter registration barriers, frequent elections that cause voter fatigue, lack of effective candidate messaging to engage voters, and failure to reach out to younger and minority groups. It suggests ways to increase turnout like voter registration drives, consolidating elections, improving candidate communication, using technology to modernize voting, and making the voting experience consistent and simple. The overall goal is to find ways to increase voter participation at the local level where citizens can have the most direct impact.
Memphis Flyer - Contemporary Media Trump Cover Complaint Woody Savage
Memphis Flyer November 10, 2016 Issue featured an obscene phrase related to Trump's photo on the cover. This document addresses the author's concerns to the publisher.
This document provides a summary of a student's literature review on the topic of public subsidies for professional sports stadiums. It discusses several academic articles that analyze the economic impacts of stadium development projects and debate whether they provide meaningful economic benefits to cities. The student's literature review examines studies that use various quantitative and qualitative methods such as economic modeling, surveys, interviews, and case studies of specific cities and stadium deals. Overall, the research presented in the literature review explores both sides of the debate around public financing of private sports facilities.
This document provides an overview of the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office), which have tasked a community policing team with building trust between police and communities. It analyzes the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for both organizations. It also researches details about MCCA such as its leadership breakdown and social media presence. MCCA's plan to increase public trust focuses on policies for releasing information, leveraging social media, and subjecting agencies to public reviews. The document aims to inform the team's program goals, objectives, strategies and tactics.
Respond to EACH post (3 total) 150 words each and using at least T.docxdebishakespeare
Respond to EACH post (3 total) 150 words each and using at least TWO reference sources EACH (not the same ones for each). Write whether or not you agree and why. How informative the post was, etc. THANKS
POST ONE
Using a reasonable person standard, one might assume that millions of dollars in campaign contributions have a deleterious effect on a candidate’s behavior, given that the money has to come from someone’s pocket and there is no such thing as a free lunch. Looking back over the past 14 years, the pattern of change in presidential elections and midterm elections is the same – growth. Worse still, those who achieved victory in the House of Representatives outspent those who lost their bid by almost 3-to-1, and the delta between the costliest campaign and the most frugal was a whopping 101-to-1. (Center for Responsive Politics n.d.)
OpenSecrets.org
The aggregate cost of the 2012 elections exceeded 6 billion dollars. With nine zeros to the right of the significant digit, this is money from very deep pockets. In 2012, the top five Political Action Committees (PACs) contributed 16.8 million dollars. As significant as that may appear, the top five individual donors contributed 173.3 million dollars, and unlike the PACs who spread the funds between parties, the individual donors were monolithic in one direction or the other. (Center for Responsive Politics n.d.)
Lee Drutman, writing in The Washington Post, posits that no one is really trying to “buy” a candidate so much as they are establishing a foundation of understanding from which to establish a “relationship” with the elected official. For the small player or non-contributor in the process that is politics today, there is no “relationship” built on massive campaign contributions, leaving one to question just whom the elected official is representing when decisions are being made. (Drutman 2014)
Regardless of the aggregate cost of running a political campaign, unless someone has devised a mechanism to turn money into votes, purchasing an election is a fiction. It is a fiction sold to the public with the same carelessness displayed by the use of the term, “assault rifle” which may be an attempt to make the public think there are selectable-fire military weapons in use or the journalist is simply ignorant. (Pamer 2015)
Granted, in the 2012 elections in the House of Representative, losers only outspent winners in 25 races, but just as there are states and there are swing states, there is a similar nature reflected in political districts. For example, in California District 12, incumbent Nancy Pelosi (D) outspent challenger John Dennis (R) by a 4-to-1 margin ($2,001,648 to $480,226). When the winner was nearly a foregone conclusion, as was the case of the Democratic incumbent receiving 85% of the votes in a district containing the city of San Francisco, the fact that most of the money went to the favored candidate is only logical. (Center for Responsive Politics n.d.)
Ac ...
Campaign finance reform aims to regulate political spending and funding sources. Current regulations include contribution limits, disclosure requirements, and public financing options. However, recent Supreme Court rulings have loosened some restrictions by allowing unlimited independent expenditures and treating corporations similarly to people in terms of political spending. Critics argue this disproportionately benefits wealthy interests and undermines democracy, while supporters see it as protecting free speech. The impact of money in politics continues to be widely debated.
The document discusses fraud risks faced by non-profit organizations, noting that fraud accounts for estimated losses of $40 billion annually in the non-profit sector. It outlines common types of fraud such as skimming donations, creating fraudulent tax losses, and overstating expenses. The document also provides recommendations for non-profits to implement controls to prevent fraud, such as requiring two signatures on checks and having bank statements sent directly to someone other than the treasurer.
This document discusses the ethics of gambling and summarizes a research probe on the topic. It begins by providing context on gambling as a controversial leisure activity and discusses how some destinations have legalized gambling for economic benefits. It then summarizes Amir Shani's argument that tourism scholarship has focused on cost-benefit analyses and resident attitudes but neglected important philosophical questions about the ethics of gambling. The responses in the probe suggest taking a pragmatic approach to minimize gambling's negative externalities and unethical expressions.
This document provides an industry analysis of the U.S. nonprofit news sector, with a focus on web-based startups. It includes case studies of four nonprofit news organizations: NPR, Chicago Public Media, New America Foundation, and The Sapling Foundation (TED). The nonprofit news industry faces challenges including an overreliance on unreliable grants and pressures not to develop sustainable business models. However, nonprofit news outlets are attempting to fill coverage gaps left by for-profit media, particularly in investigative reporting and coverage of local issues. The case study of NPR highlights how it has adapted to changes in media consumption through expanding its digital offerings and mobile apps, though concerns remain about the impact of new car technologies on commuter listeners
The document discusses lessons learned from Barack Obama's successful use of new media in his 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns. It outlines how Obama was able to raise over $550 million online through leveraging new media as "impulse candy" and a "greeter" to efficiently reach niche audiences. It also discusses how to streamline paths to action, leverage urgency and special moments, continuously test and improve, and share content to encourage grassroots participation.
Presentation given to my class as part of my studies for a Masters Degree in Public Affairs and Political Communication. The presentation looks at the use of voter data and the Get Out The Vote (GOTV) program run by the Obama Campaign and the Democratic Party.
EPIP/NCRP Webinar | Supersized Imbalance: Post-2014 Election, What Foundation...EPIPNational
Philanthropy cannot work in a silo or vacuum; philanthropy and the communities it serves are influenced by policy and elections. At the start of 2015, state legislatures will be in full swing with plenty of interesting policy issues on the table. For this webinar, we were joined by experts who demonstrated effective tools for understanding contemporary policy issues. We also heared from a foundation that is using data-centric tools to bolster their agenda.
Speakers:
- Christine Reeves, Senior Field Associate, National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy & Board Member, EPIP (Moderator)
- Edwin Bender, Executive Director, National Institute on Money in State Politics
- Bert Brandenberg, Executive Director, Justice at Stake
- Tara Malloy, Senior Counsel, Campaign Legal Center
- Daniel Stid, Director of the Madison Initiative, William & Flora Hewlett Foundation
Research shows that while 52.4% of those in poverty in the USA are people of color, only 16.5% of nonprofits are led by people of color, and only 3% of foundation funding goes toward organizations that are led by people of color. This presentation provides three recommendations of how AmeriCorps can counter this bias: (1) reaching out to Black and Latino led Faith-based organizations (2) requiring grantees provide diversity profiles (3) Revising funding priorities.
The document discusses the effectiveness of political attack ads and negative campaigning. It finds that:
1) Attack ads are not consistently effective at winning votes or lowering voter turnout according to meta-analyses of over 100 studies.
2) They are more effective at increasing awareness and knowledge of campaigns but can lower feelings of political efficacy and trust.
3) Negative ads are only demobilizing if voters have already chosen a candidate and then are exposed to attacks on that candidate later in the campaign. Timing is important for negative ads to be effective.
This document discusses increasing fundraising efficiency through donor segmentation. It suggests that while psychographic criteria are often used to segment donors, fundraisers typically only have access to socio-demographic data. The authors conducted a study in Austria to determine how individuals of different ages, genders, and social classes donate in terms of amount, frequency, organizations supported, and form of donation. They identified three basic conditions under which people are more likely to donate: 1) when the purpose pertains to their sphere, 2) when they may benefit from the organization's services, and 3) when the donation does not represent a high expense or effort. These conditions are proposed as dimensions for segmenting and targeting donors using socio-demographic data to
This presentation explains the reason behind the success of Obama in winning the second term.It talks about how social media can be fully utilized to promote a product or a service.
Donald Trump's use of social media in the 2016 US Presidential election transformed political campaigning into a "real time" endeavor. Through his core staff of 85 compared to Hillary Clinton's 600+, Trump drove engagement through platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit. Despite being outspent, Trump's message resonated more. Now, events have real-time impacts as crowdsourced activism and social media backlash can influence corporate decisions and consumer behavior within hours. Real-time data analytics and social physics modeling will continue shaping outcomes in business and politics.
3 ways charitable giving is likely to change in 2019 - Adam GantAdam Gant
Adam Gant discusses 3 ways charitable giving is likely to change in 2019 in this in-depth presentational blog. For more information, please visit AdamGant.org!
The document discusses voter apathy and low voter turnout in Texas, particularly in Dallas and Tarrant counties. It notes that turnout is lowest for local elections. The document analyzes potential causes of low turnout like voter registration barriers, frequent elections that cause voter fatigue, lack of effective candidate messaging to engage voters, and failure to reach out to younger and minority groups. It suggests ways to increase turnout like voter registration drives, consolidating elections, improving candidate communication, using technology to modernize voting, and making the voting experience consistent and simple. The overall goal is to find ways to increase voter participation at the local level where citizens can have the most direct impact.
Memphis Flyer - Contemporary Media Trump Cover Complaint Woody Savage
Memphis Flyer November 10, 2016 Issue featured an obscene phrase related to Trump's photo on the cover. This document addresses the author's concerns to the publisher.
This document provides a summary of a student's literature review on the topic of public subsidies for professional sports stadiums. It discusses several academic articles that analyze the economic impacts of stadium development projects and debate whether they provide meaningful economic benefits to cities. The student's literature review examines studies that use various quantitative and qualitative methods such as economic modeling, surveys, interviews, and case studies of specific cities and stadium deals. Overall, the research presented in the literature review explores both sides of the debate around public financing of private sports facilities.
This document provides an overview of the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office), which have tasked a community policing team with building trust between police and communities. It analyzes the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for both organizations. It also researches details about MCCA such as its leadership breakdown and social media presence. MCCA's plan to increase public trust focuses on policies for releasing information, leveraging social media, and subjecting agencies to public reviews. The document aims to inform the team's program goals, objectives, strategies and tactics.
Respond to EACH post (3 total) 150 words each and using at least T.docxdebishakespeare
Respond to EACH post (3 total) 150 words each and using at least TWO reference sources EACH (not the same ones for each). Write whether or not you agree and why. How informative the post was, etc. THANKS
POST ONE
Using a reasonable person standard, one might assume that millions of dollars in campaign contributions have a deleterious effect on a candidate’s behavior, given that the money has to come from someone’s pocket and there is no such thing as a free lunch. Looking back over the past 14 years, the pattern of change in presidential elections and midterm elections is the same – growth. Worse still, those who achieved victory in the House of Representatives outspent those who lost their bid by almost 3-to-1, and the delta between the costliest campaign and the most frugal was a whopping 101-to-1. (Center for Responsive Politics n.d.)
OpenSecrets.org
The aggregate cost of the 2012 elections exceeded 6 billion dollars. With nine zeros to the right of the significant digit, this is money from very deep pockets. In 2012, the top five Political Action Committees (PACs) contributed 16.8 million dollars. As significant as that may appear, the top five individual donors contributed 173.3 million dollars, and unlike the PACs who spread the funds between parties, the individual donors were monolithic in one direction or the other. (Center for Responsive Politics n.d.)
Lee Drutman, writing in The Washington Post, posits that no one is really trying to “buy” a candidate so much as they are establishing a foundation of understanding from which to establish a “relationship” with the elected official. For the small player or non-contributor in the process that is politics today, there is no “relationship” built on massive campaign contributions, leaving one to question just whom the elected official is representing when decisions are being made. (Drutman 2014)
Regardless of the aggregate cost of running a political campaign, unless someone has devised a mechanism to turn money into votes, purchasing an election is a fiction. It is a fiction sold to the public with the same carelessness displayed by the use of the term, “assault rifle” which may be an attempt to make the public think there are selectable-fire military weapons in use or the journalist is simply ignorant. (Pamer 2015)
Granted, in the 2012 elections in the House of Representative, losers only outspent winners in 25 races, but just as there are states and there are swing states, there is a similar nature reflected in political districts. For example, in California District 12, incumbent Nancy Pelosi (D) outspent challenger John Dennis (R) by a 4-to-1 margin ($2,001,648 to $480,226). When the winner was nearly a foregone conclusion, as was the case of the Democratic incumbent receiving 85% of the votes in a district containing the city of San Francisco, the fact that most of the money went to the favored candidate is only logical. (Center for Responsive Politics n.d.)
Ac ...
Campaign finance reform aims to regulate political spending and funding sources. Current regulations include contribution limits, disclosure requirements, and public financing options. However, recent Supreme Court rulings have loosened some restrictions by allowing unlimited independent expenditures and treating corporations similarly to people in terms of political spending. Critics argue this disproportionately benefits wealthy interests and undermines democracy, while supporters see it as protecting free speech. The impact of money in politics continues to be widely debated.
Case Study Grading Rubric – Fall 2015Levels of Quality.docxtidwellveronique
Case Study Grading Rubric – Fall 2015
Levels of Quality
Performance
Criteria
Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations
Exceptional
Structure
0 to 10 points
Disorganized
Needs reorganizing
Well organized, flows logically
Analysis
0 to 40 points
Mostly opinions, arguments not supported
Some arguments supported
All solid arguments with support
Style and Readability
0 to 10 points
Many misspellings, not edited, problems with grammar and sentence structure
Less than 3 misspellings, appears to be edited, grammar and sentence structure acceptable
No misspellings, well edited, grammar and sentence structure excellent, easily readable
Originality
0 to 20 points
Not original, based solely on lectures and readings
Less than 3 original insights and arguments
Many original insights and arguments
Thoroughness
0 to 20 points
Some elements of assignment not completed
All elements of assignment completed
All elements of assignment completed with exceptional thoroughness
Center for Public Integrity
The ‘Citizens United’ decision and why it matters
Nonprofits or political parties?
By John Dunbaremail
By now most folks know that the U.S. Supreme Court did something that changed how money can be spent in elections and by whom, but what happened and why should you care?
The Citizens United ruling, released in January 2010, tossed out the corporate and union ban on making independent expenditures and financing electioneering communications. It gave corporations and unions the green light to spend unlimited sums on ads and other political tools, calling for the election or defeat of individual candidates.
In a nutshell, the high court’s 5-4 decision said that it is OK for corporations and labor unions to spend as much as they want to convince people to vote for or against a candidate.
The decision did not affect contributions. It is still illegal for companies and labor unions to give money directly to candidates for federal office. The court said that because these funds were not being spent in coordination with a campaign, they “do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”
So if the decision was about spending, why has so much been written about contributions? Like seven and eight-figure donations from people like casino magnate and billionaire Sheldon Adelson who, with his family, has given about $40 million to so-called “super PACs,” formed in the wake of the decision?
For that, we need to look at another court case — SpeechNow.org v. FEC. The lower-court case used the Citizens United case as precedent when it said that limits on contributions to groups that make independent expenditures are unconstitutional.
And that’s what led to the creation of the super PACs, which act as shadow political parties. They accept unlimited donations from billionaires, corporations and unions and use it to buy advertising, most of it negative.
The Supreme Court kept limits on disclosure in place, and super PACs are requi ...
Press Release - Fair Elections Now Act JoshuaBarthel
The Fair Elections Now Act would establish a public financing system for congressional elections to reduce the influence of large donors. It would provide matching funds for small donations to candidates and introduce a tax credit for small donors. Proponents argue this would amplify smaller voices and make elections more fair and representative.
The document discusses several aspects of successful political campaigns, including building name recognition, voter mobilization through get-out-the-vote efforts, decreasing support for opponents, fundraising, hiring professional consultants, and focusing the campaign strategy. Fundraising is important in the beginning to hire staff who can work on voter outreach, while consultants can advise on multiple races. The campaign aims to get voters to the polls and persuade them through different methods.
Alsindi 1Dhari Alsindi Professor Cole POLS 372 14 April .docxnettletondevon
Alsindi 1
Dhari Alsindi
Professor Cole
POLS 372
14 April 2016
Homework #5
Poverty is responsible for a decrease in voter turnout. Therefore, what are the main components of poverty contributing to a decrease in voter turnout? The following essay will explore the significant voting factors that play a role in the poverty stricken societies. One indicator commonly used to measure voter turnout is the proportion of individuals who participate in the political system. Defining the underlying effects of decreasing voter turnout rates can be challenging. A low turnout may be due to disappointment or indifference, or even complacent satisfaction with the way the nation is being governed. Contrariwise, a high turnout rate may reflect compulsory voting laws or pressure. Voter turnout therefore societies do not maintain sufficient indicator of social cohesion. The vast majority of political analysts, however, consider a high voter turnout to be desirable to a low turnout because it indicates that the government is inclined to reflect the benefits of a larger share of the population. Low voter turnout suggests that the democratic system may not be replicating the happiness of all citizens. Voter turnout tends to be decrease among youth, those who are less educated, and those in lower income brackets.
Literature Review
The following article titled “Income Inequality, Redistribution, and Poverty: Contrasting Rational Choice and Behavioral Perspectives” written by Malte Luebker explores the difference in political representation from citizens according to their income. Income plays a large role within political participation in the United States of America. The article is grounded on the “standard axiom of individual utility maximization”. The author effectively offers research suggesting individuals who earn a higher income inequality translates into greater participation in influencing the median voter's participation. While numerous scholarly articles tested this suggestion, the journal continues through offering separated over the applicable degree for redistribution. The article often refers to additional articles that argue similar aspects. However, the current paper argues that the median voter theory suggests that comparative redistribution should rise in line with poverty. The article also provides empirical evidence. An empirical test was presented based on 110 observations from the Luxembourg Income Study ( LIS ). The results test the narrow concept of human motivation that supports rational choice, and highlight the importance of justice orientations that have been stressed in social economics.
The article “What Affects Voter Turnout” by André Blais explores significant information related to the reasons why the United States faces lower voter turnout rates as opposed to other regions. The article mentions an effective question, “Why is turnout higher in some countries and/or in some elections than in others? And Why does it increase .
The document discusses three different polls and analyzes whether they were biased, fair, or a mixture of both. It depicts the polls in a table with their strengths and weaknesses. The findings showed that all three polls had some degree of bias, either in their wording or methodology. The sources of the polls did not influence their reliability or accuracy. The document aims to investigate the fairness of the polls and outlines what makes a poll fair and unbiased. It discusses different types of polls like benchmark, tracking, and exit polls.
Reflect on voter participation, campaign financing, and the legitimafelipaser7p
Reflect on voter participation, campaign financing, and the legitimacy of elections. Also discuss whether financing elections solely with tax dollars and banning contributions from special interest groups and individuals would make elections more representative of the will of the American people. Discuss whether “voter ID laws” have the effect of disenfranchising eligible voters or of protecting the sanctity of elections from fraud.
In responding to your classmates, discuss how the low level of voter turnout in American elections can make those elections less legitimate than they would be with higher turnout. Explain and support your position.
For your response posts (2), you must do the following:
Reply to at least two different classmates outside of your own initial post thread.
In Module One, complete the two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time.
In Modules Two through Eight, complete the two response posts by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. of your local time zone.
Demonstrate more depth and thought than simply stating that “I agree” or “You are wrong.”
Guidance is provided for you in each discussion prompt.
classmates Post #1:
In this discussion, many questions are being raised about elections in general. Let’s look at these question one at a time:
Voter Participation: The Soomo web text covered that issue very well. It stated that a few criteria exist for the participation of voter, and they are usually categorized under a few categories. Voter Turnout is identified as more than approximately 74 % are college graduates, most who also vote to have annual incomes above 50 k per year also most who vote are older American over the age of 35 years or older. A lot of the voting is along party line as opposed to the quality of the candidate. But my feeling is that voters are moving toward voting for the candidate as opposed to the party. (Evans, J., & Michaud, K)
Campaign Financing: The content is always at the forefront of the news every election cycle. Monies are being thrown at the candidates and many illegal items come out of the campaigns. For example; Lavish Trips, extra activities not associated with the campaign (diner, escorts etc…) Dark money donor is and always have been an issue these monies are not recorded, this is almost like play money for the campaigns to do what they want, with whoever they want. The SuperPAC monies are for the candidate to be influenced in a way that the average person never knows about. The candidate doesn’t speak of the donation while on the speech tours but the widely influence the route a candidate take after he is elected. Even in small-town elections the monies from developers, business influences are given being the seen for agendas that no one sees. (Evans, J., & Michaud, K)
The legitimacy of Elections and the Voter ID issue goes hand in hand with each other. Many believe that voter fraud and the id or lack thereof is the biggest is ...
American Government - Chapter 7 - Participationcyruskarimian
The document discusses various forms of political participation and factors that influence individuals' likelihood to participate. It notes that participation requires expenditures of resources like time, money, and expertise. Different forms of participation convey different amounts of information and have different costs. Voting has relatively low costs but also conveys limited information. More involved activities like campaign donations convey more information but have higher costs. Participation rates vary between groups and are generally higher among those with more resources and education.
The document summarizes previous literature on the benefits that the Democratic and Republican parties receive from holding their national conventions. Some studies have found that the Democratic Party benefits more in terms of electoral gains. The literature disagrees on whether convention location matters and if it produces benefits. Some studies found no statewide effects, while others found local benefits within media markets. Most agree that Democrats receive greater benefits, such as larger vote increases and ability to attract voters across party lines. Explanations for the Democratic advantage are not fully explained in the literature.
1. THE POWER OF THE PAC
The Effect of District Income on PAC Spending
Mike Holtz and Jonah Ragsdale
The Politics of Congressional Elections
12/15/2014
An Analysis
Does the affluence of a districtchangethe way money is funneled into its elections? An analytic
study of income and PAC contributions,in relation to the origin of contributions
2. 1
Intro
$3,665,416,368. That’s how much was spent in the 2014 federal elections (Choma,
Novak 2014), equivalent to giving every man, woman and child in the United States 11
McDonalds double cheeseburgers. Each year, billions of dollars are spent on federal elections -
paying for everything from TV spots, to field offices, to staff salaries. And it has a major effect,
too. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, 8 out of 10 Senate candidates who spend
the most money win their elections. In the House, that number is 9 out of 10 and growing
(Biersack 2010). While it is possible that these statistics show correlation rather than causation,
there is no doubt that money matters in politics.
One of the fastest growing areas in campaign finance is the realm of political action
committees (PACs). Rising to prominence in the 1970s, PACs were created to circumvent
certain campaign finance laws and give outside groups and individuals a way to get involved in
the political process. As restrictions on PACs have loosened over the years - especially through a
string of high profile Supreme Court cases - they have started to play a bigger role in American
politics. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, outside groups were responsible for
13% of all reported election spending in 2014 (Choma 2014). In some races, PACs actually spent
more than the campaigns themselves.
With major influence, elections aren’t the only area PACs are gaining ground in. Using
large donations as a bartering tool, PACs provide a lobby in a way that extends further than their
influence on voter choice. Alan Simpson notes, “Too often, Members' first thought is not what is
right or wrong or what they believe, but how will it affect fundraising. Who, after all, can
seriously contend that a $100,000 donation does not alter the way one thinks about—and quite
possibly votes on—an issue?” (Has Money 2014).
3. 2
With PACs’ impact growing, it is important to understand where they chose to spend
their money and which races benefit the most. Why do certain candidates receive more PAC
money than others? What explains the growing out-of-district donor bases for many candidates?
Few people have looked to district income as a possible factor in the PAC decision-making
process. Does the wealth of a district influence the amount a given candidate will receive? Are
candidates from poorer districts more likely to seek PAC money to compensate for smaller donor
bases? We believe that, upon further exploration, analysis will show this to be true. In our
research, we seek to find this answer - to explain one of many possible reasons why PACs
contribute the way they do.
Theory
The battle for a voice in Washington is one that is fought by more than just a candidate
running for Congress. PACs and interest groups also play an extremely important role,
contributing to the election process. Every campaign needs funding, and tracking the source of
that money provides valuable insight into who holds influence in the halls of Congress.
In the world of campaign finance, as the amount of money has increased, the number of
donors has also decreased in response to the Citizens United ruling. According to the Center for
Responsive Politics, since 2010 the number of individuals giving $200+ has decreased from
817,464 to 666,773 (Choma 2014). In a 2012 study of campaign contributions, Harvard Law
professor Lawrence Lessig found that only 0.26% of the population donated $200 or more to
political campaigns, even though these donations account for nearly ⅔ of all campaign
contributions (Has Money 2014). According to Lessig, there are less relevant political donors in
the United States than there are people named “Lester.” More interesting, perhaps, is where these
donors live. These donors are centered in a limited number of urban zip codes, namely in New
4. 3
York, Washington, Chicago, and Los Angeles. For candidates in these districts, there is a large
donor base to turn to, but for candidates in less wealthy districts, finding constituents to donate
any money - let alone the millions needed to win an election - can be difficult. Though these
districts may have less expensive media markets and material costs, there is still a hefty price of
running any campaign. We suspect that these candidates find other ways to make up for the lack
of donations. These may include dipping into their personal fortunes or courting campaign
donors from other districts. However, until 2014, donors faced aggregate limits that prevented
them from donating to dozens of campaigns. With this in mind, we believe candidates in lower-
income districts are more likely to turn to political action committees to make up their
deficits. With more value to their money, PACs - including party committees, issue advocacy
organizations, and independent-expenditure groups (i.e. Super PACs) - can take advantage of
these low income areas to potentially earn a greater return on their investment by a low cost
election win.
If we are correct, and candidates in lower-income districts are more likely to seek out
PAC money, this can shed light on the legislative priorities of candidates, the nature of campaign
funding and how PACs allocate funds. However, before anyone can explore the implications of
an income-PAC money connection, it is important to first discover whether such a connection
exists. To do this, we will compare House campaign finance data from 2008, 2010 and 2012 to
district income data to see if our hypothesis holds its ground.
Literature Review
While research on the link between district income and PAC donations is scarce, separate
research on both PAC behavior and district income sheds a light on the possible connection
between these two factors.
5. 4
Though they have only been major players in the American political arena for the past
few decades, PACs have established a lasting niche in the world of campaign finance, and have
been the subject of intense examination. On a basic level, FEC records show the growth of
PACs, from the first PAC during World War II - creatively named the “Political Action
Committee” - to a boom of PACs in the 1980s, to the rise of “Super PACs” after the Citizens
United decision in 2010.
Throughout this time, academics have also weighed in - focusing specifically on what
makes PACs donate to certain candidates. Some of the most prominent research relates to
incumbency. According to a study by Professors Kevin Grier and Michael Munger in the Journal
of Politics, over 80% of PAC donations in the 1980s went to incumbents (Grier 1991, 617).
Subsequent studies have reaffirmed this notion of a seeming incumbency advantage for
donations (Endersby 1992). Other research has found additional factors. For instance, a 1994
study by Professors Thomas Romer and James Snyder found that committee assignments and
committee chairmanships were huge factors in attracting PAC donations. Romer and Snyder
found such a strong correlation between PACs and certain committees, that sometimes PACs
would drop candidates after years of support if they decided to switch committees. This data is
supported by Grier and Munger, who, through a series of chi-square tests, shed light on a strong
relationship between certain industries and donations to relevant congressional committees.
Since the 1980s, various studies have found correlations between PAC donations and
voting records, party ID, candidate viability, and other factors. While some PACs have been
upfront about their criteria for choosing candidates, many are shrouded in secrecy and their
methods are often unknown. Scholars have sought to plug in the holes and draw conclusions,
leading campaign finance expert Janet Grenzke admits there is “considerable controversy”
6. 5
surrounding certain claims, and that many of the conflicting studies are subjective in nature
(Grenzke 1989, 2). In essence, while studies have uncovered a lot about the mindset of PACs,
much is still unknown about why PACs spend money the way they do and what impact it has.
To understand any correlation between PACs and district income, it is important to not
only understand the mindset of PACs, but to also understand the role of income in the election
process. Currently, the U.S. political system operates with a relatively small relevant donor base-
what Lawrence Lessig called the “Lester” pool. Less than 1% of Americans donate $200 or more
to political campaigns, accounting for over 80% of political donations (Has Money 2014). And
according to data from the Public Citizen’s Congress Watch, 86 percent of those contributions
are from households earning $100,000 per year or more. These donors are generally wealthy,
well educated, and concentrated in a small number of congressional districts. But, according to a
2008 study by James Gimpel and Frances Lee, what’s more shocking is how many districts do
not have major donor bases. “We were quite astonished to see that there are major sections of the
country that give almost nothing,” Gimpel said (Drutman 2008). “There are a great many
congressional districts where there just isn’t much wealth.” The key, according to Gimpel, was
cross-district donations.
Johns Hopkins Professor Lee Drutman pointed to this discrepancy between districts,
noting that, as of 2004, 4 in 5 congressional districts received more money from out of district
than from within their district (Drutman 2008). And in 18% of congressional districts, over 90%
of donations are from outside donors. This trend dates back to at least the 1980s, and has not
changed much since (Grenzke 1988). Gimpel’s 2008 study - one of the most in-depth studies on
the topic - stressed not only that donor’s give money across state lines, but that “inter-district
funding flows are guided by partisan networks” (Gimpel 2008). This notion, alongside aggregate
7. 6
limit laws in place until early 2014, suggest that PACs and other political organizations could be
responsible for helping prop up candidates in low-income districts. We hope to explore this
possibility further.
Data and Methods
Despite limited research on the topic, our hypothesis was formulated using reasonable
speculation that candidates in poorer districts receive less campaign donations from constituents.
As a result, one would expect PAC contributions to play a greater role as money from outside
districts is an increasing occurrence in districts across the country. Our testable hypothesis was
that districts with lower mean incomes have higher amounts PAC spending and contributions as
opposed to wealthier districts. We operated off the assumption that where there is less money,
money is worth more and therefore PAC money has more value in less wealthy districts.
In order to measure the relationship between district wealth and PAC spending as a whole,
building a financial representation of a district is necessary to conclude a significant impact.
While there are many economic variables that could be used to assess the affluence of a
given district, we chose mean household income as our independent variable. Mean income
measures the average household income of constituents. It has been used in previous studies of
geographic income levels, and serves as a general indicator of district wealth. To evaluate district
income levels, we turned to the United States Census Bureau. In its collection efforts, the Census
Bureau records household income levels from across the country, and calculates the estimated
mean income by congressional district. We gathered the mean household income data from every
congressional district during four congressional election years - 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012. To
ensure consistency in our model, these numbers were then adjusted for inflation to reflect their
real value in 2012 dollars (US Census Bureau 2006-2012).
8. 7
Because our theory relies on a potential relationship with PAC spending, data on
spending by political action committees for each congressional district was collected as well.
This data was collected from Stanford University’s Database on Ideology, Money in Politics, and
Elections (DIME) (Bonica 2013). For these data points, we set specific guidelines for what
money would be considered in our formula. In order for PAC contributions to be considered in
the model, only money spent in general elections on candidates that participated in the general
election were considered. This included multiple third party candidates that received PAC money
in the general election, but excluded PAC money given in contested primaries. These figures
were then added to create an aggregate measure for each congressional district across the four
year analysis. Like the mean income, the PAC contributions were adjusted for inflation and
converted into 2012 value. In addition, the mean income and average PAC contribution were
calculated for the nation as a whole during each of the four years.
For our experiment, we chose to run three different linear regressions using PAC
contributions as the dependent variable and mean household income as the independent variable.
In other words, the variable being directly adjusted was the mean income of the district, while
the effect on PAC contributions was analyzed to determine possible connections. For all three
tests we used the same basic statistical model, while adjusting some features for outside factors
in the latter two tests. In the first model, we ran the two variables alone in a linear regression for
an unadjusted control. This pure model runs a smaller margin of error, and therefore provides the
most direct and unaffected relationship. The last two models, however, were adjusted for
possible discrepancies one might see across years and districts. The second model was adjusted
to reflect the differences across years, providing a less pure correlation with a similar margin of
error, but allowing for a potentially more realistic outcome than the first model. The final model
9. 8
was adjusted for the differences in congressional districts during each year. This increased the
margin of error significantly, but was the most realistic regression model due to its compensation
for variables not reflected in the original test.
Ultimately, all three models provide interesting insight into the income-PAC spending
relationship. In order to prove our hypothesis through these methods, we would have to see
significant and consistent negative correlation between the increase in district income and PAC
spending.
Results
TABLE 1 GOES HERE
In table 1, the three models and their results are shown in order along with their
adjustments (indicated in the lower rows). The total (N) remained constant with the number of
congressional districts analyzed in each test. The first row represents the linear regression
coefficients with the margins of error listed in parenthesis. The constants listed are the
contributions received by congressional candidates. We have indicated statistically significant
variables with asterisks.
In the first trial (the pure model), the regression produced a positive coefficient of 2.3
with a .9 margin of error. This result showed that rather than the negative regression we
expected, the correlation was positive as both fields increased. Instead of a decrease in income
leading to higher PAC contributions, an increase in district mean income led to increases in PAC
money being spent and contributed to a district. This result - though not drastic - is statistically
significant as it is well above the margin of error, showing that instead of a negative correlation,
there is evidence that a positive relationship could exist. Our dependent variable then produced
the constant 527,816.8 with a margin of error of 57,818.3 giving us once again a statistically
10. 9
significant result. As reflected in the graphs below, the pure model showed trend lines close to
horizontal with slightly positive slopes in 2006 and 2012. While this model did not agree with
our hypothesis, it did show a slightly positive relationship between the mean income and PAC
spending in congressional districts.
FIGURES 1-4 INSERTED HERE
While the first model was run without adjusting for outside variables, we chose to re-run the
model adjusting for certain differences that would potentially impact the relationship. The
second model was adjusted for potential differences between the four years comprising our data.
In doing this adjustment, we created a more consistent model than the first. This accounts for
factors such as the 2010 Citizens United decision or changes in district income over time. In this
second test, we found the results to once again be positive with a regression coefficient of 1.4.
However, the margin of error stays the same at .9 leading us to believe this outcome is no longer
statistically significant. While these results are similar to those of the first test, they are not
substantial enough to conclude that there is a relationship between the two variables. The
dependent variable, however, still remains statistically significant. With a constant of 478,333.5
and a margin of error of 55,113.4, we can still conclude that the outcome is significant enough.
The last test provides what is possibly the most realistic examination of an association
between the two data sets. In this test, not only did we adjust for the potential differences across
years, but we also adjusted for potential district differences across the years by accounting for
860 fixed groups. In doing this, not only do we add a more impactful adjustment, but we also
allow for a more realistic examination of both data sets. In this regression, we found a much
stronger correlation between mean income and PAC contributions with the regression coefficient
rising to 4.7. However, our margin of error significantly increased due to the adjustments,
11. 10
leaving us with a stronger result but an inconclusive one as well. The margin of error of 3.5 led
us to believe that the relationship was still positive, but could not be considered a substantial
outcome. The constant in this model then fell to 301,161.7, but like the coefficient, was then
subjected to an extremely high margin of error at 233,236.3, once again leaving us with an
indecisive product. While maintaining a positive relationship, there is very little evidence to
support that our adjusted variables didn’t lead to the increase in the coefficient.
By examining all of these outcomes, it becomes clear our hypothesis proved to be
incorrect. While we predicted that poorer districts would receive more PAC money to fill
potential gaps in local donations, our results found the opposite to be true. In all three models,
the regression coefficients proved to be positive, rather the negative coefficient our hypothesis
suggested. While two of the coefficients were not statistically significant enough to prove that
positive correlation is definite, the fact that all three were still slightly positive sheds significant
doubt on the veracity of our hypothesis. While not conclusive, there is minimal evidence that a
negative correlation exists between mean income and PAC contributions.
While our adjustments led to different outcomes, our coefficient remained slightly
positive in the final two tests. And though the margin of error significantly increased in the last
test, the fact that the coefficient remained positive could be proof that this relationship will
remain positive as more data is included or as other variables and adjustments make the model
more realistic.
However, because the pure model without adjustments was the only significant outcome,
it is reasonable to assume that there is no evidence for a correlation between the wealth of a
district and the PAC contributions to any given congressional district.
Discussion
12. 11
Through this study, we had a chance to look at an area of American politics that is
growing rapidly but escapes the attention of most Americans: Campaign finance. We began with
a hypothesis that candidates in less wealthy districts - districts with few elite donors - would turn
to out-of-district PACs for funding. We predicted that lower-income districts would see more
PAC donations than their wealthier peers. And while our research did not rear enough evidence
to support this hypothesis, our results bring an interesting addition to the discussion on campaign
finance.
From other funding sources, to PAC decision factors, to imperfect testing methods, there
are several possible reasons why our hypothesis might not have held its ground, and they are all
worth exploring.
One of the main reasons why our data might not have shown PAC money flowing
heavily to low-income districts is because candidates in these districts turn to individual outside
donors instead. While PAC donations have been growing lately, it is important to remember that
they still account for less than 13% of all election donations (Choma 2014). The majority of
donors still give the old fashioned way - writing checks to individual campaigns. And though the
nation’s top donors are concentrated in only a select few congressional districts, research shows
that they donate to campaigns across the nation. As mentioned in the Literature Review, Gimpel
and Lee’s 2008 study found that over ⅔ of House campaign contributions came from out of state
(Gimpel 2008). Originally, we had brushed this evidence aside, in light of aggregate limits that
prevented donors from giving to more than a few campaigns. However, the major flow of outside
funding from high to low income districts, coupled with our findings that PAC donations are
likely not the main vehicle of these transfers, suggests that, despite aggregate limits, individual
donors have been able to successfully prop up candidates in less wealthy districts.
13. 12
This idea is particularly interesting since aggregate limits were abolished in 2014 with the
Supreme Court’s decision in McCutcheon v. FEC. In a personal interview, Sean McCutcheon,
the multimillionaire donor behind the landmark case, explained to us that he hoped the decision
would allow Americans like himself to contribute to dozens of elections across varying states,
claiming that “free speech benefits all Americans, regardless of income or political views”
(McCutcheon 2014). With this in mind, the McCutcheon case could lead to even more inter-
district donations.
Another factor that could have led to the lack of evidence for our hypothesis is the
various other considerations that influence PAC financing decisions. While it is possible, as we
predicted, that candidates from lower-income districts are more likely to seek PAC donations, it
is ultimately up to the PACS - rather than the candidates - to decide where their money goes.
With the dozens of possible components, including candidate ideology, viability, voting record,
and incumbency, district income is likely not at the forefront of the PAC decision-making
process.
A final element worth considering when reviewing our analysis is the way the experiment
was conducted. While our methods clearly showed no evidence of a correlation between district
income and PAC donation amounts, it is still possible that other dependent variables could have
yielded a different result. For instance, we could have examined the percent of total spending in a
district that came from PACs. It is important to realize that many lower income districts, like
rural Missouri, likely have lower campaign costs (i.e. building rents, supplies, ads, etc.) and
cheaper media markets than a district in New York or San Francisco. So, if a candidate in a low-
income district received $1 million in PAC donations, compared to $2 million in a high-income
district, the high-income candidate would be associated more with PAC spending by our metrics,
14. 13
even though the low-income candidate may have taken a larger percent of her donations from
PACs.
In the final analysis, we believe that this study is a potential launching point for further
research. We sought to examine an area of campaign finance where little previous research has
been done, and found interesting results. While our hypothesis proved to be incorrect, our
analysis shed light on the cross-section of income and PACs. In the future, by looking at PAC
contribution percent’s, or simply examining post-McCutcheon data from 2014 and beyond, we
believe that there is room for more exploration, more discovery, and deeper insight into the ever-
expanding world of campaign finance.
15. 14
References
Biersack, Bob. "The Big Spender Always Wins?" Open Secrets. Last modified January 12, 2010.
Accessed December 15, 2014. http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/01/big-spender-
always-wins/.
Bonica, Adam. "Database on Ideology, Money in Politics, and Elections." Stanford University
Libraries. Last modified 2013. http://data.stanford.edu/dime.
Choma, Russ. "Money Won on Tuesday, But Rules of the Game Changed." Open Secrets. Last
modified November 5, 2014. Accessed December 15, 2014.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/11/money-won-on-tuesday-but-rules-of-the-
game-changed/.
Choma, Russ, and Viveca Novak. "Overall Spending Inches Up in 2014: Megadonors Equip
Outside Groups to Capture a Bigger Share of the Pie." Open Secrets. Last modified
October 29, 2014. Accessed December 15, 2014.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/10/overall-spending-inches-up-in-2014-
megadonors-equip-outside-groups-to-capture-a-bigger-share-of-the-pie/.
Drutman, Lee. "The Rise of the Political Donor Class." Pacific Standard. Last modified August
26, 2008. Accessed December 15, 2014. http://www.psmag.com/navigation/politics-and-
law/the-rise-of-the-political-donor-class-4305/.
"Federal PAC." Human Rights Campaigns. Accessed December 15, 2014.
http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/federal-pac.
Gimpel, James G., Frances E. Lee, and Shanna Pearson-Merkowitz. "The Check Is in the Mail:
Interdistrict Funding Flows in Congressional Elections." American Journal of Political
Science 52, no. 2 (April 2008): 373-94.
Grenzke, Janet. "Comparing Contributions to U.S. House Members from Outside Their
Districts." Legislative Studies Quarterly 13, no. 1 (1988): 83-103. Accessed December 7,
2014.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/439946.pdf?&acceptTC=true&jpdConfirm=true.
Grenzke, Janet M. "PACs and the Congressional Supermarket: The Currency is Complex."
American Journal of Political Science 33, no. 1 (February 1989): 1-24.
Grier, Kevin B., and Michael C. Munger. "Comparing Interest Group PAC Contributions to
House and Senate Incumbents, 1980–1986." The Journal of Politics 55, no. 03 (August
1993): 615-43.
"Has Money Taken Over American Politics?" National Public Radio 14 Mar. 2014: n.
pag. NPR. <http://www.npr.org/2014/03/14/288631511/has-money-taken-over-american-
politics>.
16. 15
McCutcheon, Shaun. Personal interview. 17 Apr. 2014.
Mean Income by Congressional District. N.p.: US Census Bureau, 2006-2012. Accessed
December 1, 2014. http://factfinder2.census.gov.
Romer, Thomas, and James M. Snyder, Jr. "An Empirical Investigation of the Dynamics of PAC
“Contributions.” American Journal of Political Science 38, no. 03 (August 1994): 745-69.
17. 16
Tables & Figures
Table 1
(1) (2) (3)
Mean income
(inflation-adjusted)
2.3*
(0.9)
1.4
(0.9)
4.7
(3.5)
Constant 527816.8*
(57919.3)
478333.5*
(55113.4)
301161.7
(233236.3)
N (total) 1726 1726 1726
N (groups) -- -- 860
Year fixed effects? No Yes Yes
District fixed effects? No No Yes
Entries are linear regression coefficients with standard errors (clustered on district in
parentheses). The dependent variable is the amount of PAC contributions received by
congressional candidates, adjusted for inflation. * indicate p < 0.05 (two-tailed tests).
18. 17
Figure 1
This shows the plots for district mean income in relation to PAC spending for 2012 with the
trend line
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000
PACSpending
District Mean Income
2012 Mean Income in relation to PAC Spending
19. 18
Figure 2
This shows the plots for district mean income in relation to PAC spending for 2010 with the
trend line
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000
PACSpending
District Mean Income
2010 Mean Income in Relation to PAC Spending
20. 19
Figure 3
This shows the plots for district mean income in relation to PAC spending for 2008 with the
trend line
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000
PACSpending
District Mean Income
2008 Mean Income in Relation to PAC Spending
21. 20
Figure 4
This shows the plots for district mean income in relation to PAC spending for 2006 with the
trend line
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000
PACSpending
District Mean Income
2006 Mean Income in Relation to PAC Spending