IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/127295.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Campaign contributions and legislative behavior: evidence from U.S. congress

Author

Listed:
  • Parmigiani, Alberto

Abstract

What is the relationship between campaign contributions and legislative behavior of elected representatives? In this paper, I find that more concentrated donations negatively correlate with three costly legislative endeavors of members of Congress: bill sponsorship, speechmaking on the floor and witness appearances before committees. For bill sponsorship, the negative correlation is stronger for topics related to redistribution, such as health and social welfare bills. To interpret these results, I argue that a more skewed structure of contributions makes members of Congress more dependent on their top donors and thus potentially more inclined to represent their interests. By reciprocating favors to donors, by seeking to secure their continued financial support, or simply by enjoying more leisure time as a result of feeling secure in their financial backing, federal legislators are less active in activities related to the Congressional agenda and public policy. Overall, I contend that campaign contributions distort the incentives of elected representatives to allocate legislative effort in Congress.

Suggested Citation

  • Parmigiani, Alberto, 2025. "Campaign contributions and legislative behavior: evidence from U.S. congress," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 127295, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:127295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/127295/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Craig Volden & Alan E. Wiseman & Dana E. Wittmer, 2013. "When Are Women More Effective Lawmakers Than Men?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(2), pages 326-341, April.
    2. Joshua L. Kalla & David E. Broockman, 2016. "Campaign Contributions Facilitate Access to Congressional Officials: A Randomized Field Experiment," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(3), pages 545-558, July.
    3. Miguel Antón & Florian Ederer & Mireia Giné & Martin Schmalz, 2023. "Common Ownership, Competition, and Top Management Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(5), pages 1294-1355.
    4. Stephen Ansolabehere & John M. de Figueiredo & James M. Snyder Jr, 2003. "Why is There so Little Money in U.S. Politics?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 105-130, Winter.
    5. Julia Cagé, 2024. "Political Inequality," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 16(1), pages 455-490, August.
    6. James M. Snyder & David Strömberg, 2010. "Press Coverage and Political Accountability," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(2), pages 355-408, April.
    7. Brendan Daley & Erik Snowberg, 2011. "Even if it is not Bribery: The Case for Campaign Finance Reform," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 324-349.
    8. Sarah F. Anzia & Christopher R. Berry, 2011. "The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson Effect: Why Do Congresswomen Outperform Congressmen?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 478-493, July.
    9. Hall, Richard L. & Wayman, Frank W., 1990. "Buying Time: Moneyed Interests and the Mobilization of Bias in Congressional Committees," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 84(3), pages 797-820, September.
    10. Grier, Kevin & Grier, Robin & Mkrtchian, Gor, 2023. "Campaign Contributions and Roll-Call Voting in the U.S. House of Representatives: The Case of the Sugar Industry," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 117(1), pages 340-346, February.
    11. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro & Matt Taddy, 2019. "Measuring Group Differences in High‐Dimensional Choices: Method and Application to Congressional Speech," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1307-1340, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patrick Balles & Ulrich Matter & Alois Stutzer, 2024. "Special Interest Groups Versus Voters and the Political Economics of Attention," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(662), pages 2290-2320.
    2. Chauvin, Juan Pablo & Tricaud, Clemence, 2022. "Gender and Electoral Incentives: Evidence from Crisis Response," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 12411, Inter-American Development Bank.
    3. Michael J. Barber & Brandice Canes‐Wrone & Sharece Thrower, 2017. "Ideologically Sophisticated Donors: Which Candidates Do Individual Contributors Finance?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 271-288, April.
    4. Das Chaudhury, Ratul & Leister, C. Matthew & Rai, Birendra, 2023. "Influencing a polarized and connected legislature," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 833-850.
    5. Laurent Bouton & Julia Cagé & Edgard Dewitte & Vincent Pons, 2021. "Small Campaign Donors," Working Papers hal-03878175, HAL.
    6. Shamena Anwar & Patrick Bayer & Randi Hjalmarsson, 2019. "A Jury of Her Peers: The Impact of the First Female Jurors on Criminal Convictions," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(618), pages 603-650.
    7. Brian Kelleher Richter & Krislert Samphantharak & Jeffrey F. Timmons, 2009. "Lobbying and Taxes," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 893-909, October.
    8. Stefano Gagliarducci & M Daniele Paserman, 2022. "Gender Differences in Cooperative Environments? Evidence from The U.S. Congress," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(641), pages 218-257.
    9. Raul Magni Berton & Sophie Panel, 2017. "Strategic gerontocracy: why nondemocratic systems produce older leaders," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 409-427, June.
    10. Neal, Zachary & Domagalski, Rachel & Yan, Xiaoqin, 2020. "Party Control as a Context for Homophily in Collaborations among US House Representatives, 1981 -- 2015," OSF Preprints qwdxs, Center for Open Science.
    11. Greiner, Michael & Kim, Jaemin & Cordon Thor, Jennifer, 2023. "Narcissistic CEOs and their corporate political activity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    12. Brown, Jeffrey R. & Huang, Jiekun, 2020. "All the president's friends: Political access and firm value," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 415-431.
    13. Balán, Pablo & Dodyk, Juan & Puente, Ignacio, 2022. "The political behavior of family firms: Evidence from Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Timothy Werner, 2015. "Gaining Access by Doing Good: The Effect of Sociopolitical Reputation on Firm Participation in Public Policy Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1989-2011, August.
    15. Marie Daumal, 2021. "The economic and political causes of the U.S. 2008 financial crisis [Les causes économiques et politiques de la crise financière de 2008]," Working Papers hal-03261070, HAL.
    16. Laurent Bouton & Micael Castanheira & Allan Drazen, 2024. "A Theory of Small Campaign Contributions," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(662), pages 2351-2390.
    17. Woon Leong Lin, 2018. "Do Firm’s Organisational Slacks Influence the Relationship between Corporate Lobbying and Corporate Financial Performance? More Is Not Always Better," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-23, December.
    18. Larcinese, Valentino & Parmigiani, Alberto, 2023. "Income inequality and campaign contributions: evidence from the Reagan tax cut," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118456, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Fergusson, Leopoldo, 2014. "Media markets, special interests, and voters," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 13-26.
    20. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cagé & Michael Sinkinson, 2024. "Media Competition and News Diets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 62-102, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    legislative behavior; agenda; campaign donations; congress; money in politics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:127295. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.