IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

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

Listed author(s):
  • McKay Amy

    (Georgia State University)

Registered author(s):

    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 partieseven controlling for group type.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/bap.2010.12.2/bap.2010.12.2.1306/bap.2010.12.2.1306.xml?format=INT
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by De Gruyter in its journal Business and Politics.

    Volume (Year): 12 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 2 (August)
    Pages: 1-23

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:bpj:buspol:v:12:y:2010:i:2:n:4
    Contact details of provider: Web page: https://www.degruyter.com

    Order Information: Web: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/bap

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Rui J. P. de Figueiredo & Geoff Edwards, 2007. "Does Private Money Buy Public Policy? Campaign Contributions and Regulatory Outcomes in Telecommunications," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 547-576, 09.
    2. Lewis, Jeffrey B. & Poole, Keith T., 2004. "Measuring Bias and Uncertainty in Ideal Point Estimates via the Parametric Bootstrap," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(02), pages 105-127, March.
    3. Tripathi Micky & Ansolabehere Stephen & Jr James M. Snyder, 2002. "Are PAC Contributions and Lobbying Linked? New Evidence from the 1995 Lobby Disclosure Act," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-26, August.
    4. W. Welch, 1980. "The allocation of political monies: Economic interest groups," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 97-120, January.
    5. Jackman, Simon, 2000. "Estimation and Inference Are Missing Data Problems: Unifying Social Science Statistics via Bayesian Simulation," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(04), pages 307-332, July.
    6. Magee, Christopher, 2002. "Do Political Action Committees Give Money to Candidates for Electoral or Influence Motives?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 112(3-4), pages 373-399, September.
    7. Tripathi, Micky & Ansolabehere, Stephen & Snyder, James M., 2002. "Are PAC Contributions and Lobbying Linked? New Evidence from the 1995 Lobby Disclosure Act," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(02), pages 131-155, August.
    8. Gelman, Andrew & Huang, Zaiying, 2008. "Estimating Incumbency Advantage and Its Variation, as an Example of a BeforeAfter Study," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 437-446, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:buspol:v:12:y:2010:i:2:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.