Show Me the Money: an Analysis of the Impact of Voter Recognition on the Campaign Spending Effects of House and Senate Candidates
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 2001 Show Me the Money: an Analysis of the Impact of Voter Recognition on the Campaign Spending Effects of House and Senate Candidates. Nicholas Chad Long Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Long, Nicholas Chad, "Show Me the Money: an Analysis of the Impact of Voter Recognition on the Campaign Spending Effects of House and Senate Candidates." (2001). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 420. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/420 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. SHOW ME THE MONEY: AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF VOTER RECOGNITION ON THE CAMPAIGN SPENDING EFFECTS OF HOUSE AND SENATE CANDIDATES A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Political Science by Nicholas Chad Long B.A., Northeast Louisiana University, 1993 M.A., Louisiana State University, 1998 December 2001 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3042636 UMI* UMI Microform 3042636 Copyright 2002 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Don't tell me that the rich don't know, Sooner or later it all comes down to money. -Bruce Springsteen ii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the following people: Bonita Long, my mother, for always believing in me. Grandma, Aunt Faye, and Aunt Kaye, for your love and support. The rest of my family, for keeping things interesting. Dr. James Garand, for guiding me through this project. Dr. Kevin Mulcahy, for making graduate school fun as well as educational. My other professors, for teaching me what it means to be a scholar. All of my friends, for being there. iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii LIST OF TABLES vii ABSTRACT x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 The Rising Cost of Congressional Campaigns 2 Explanations 2 Consequences 8 Conventional Wisdom Versus Scientific Evidence 13 Overview 15 Previous Findings: The Majority 15 Previous Findings: The Minority 16 The Voter Recognition Theory 17 Conclusion 18 End Notes 18 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 20 The Influence of Political Action Committees 20 The Role of Campaign War Chests 21 The Effects of Money During Campaigns 23 An Initial Exploration 24 The Endogeneity Problem 25 Second-Generation Studies 26 A Dissenting View 32 Conclusion 33 End Notes 34 3 THE THEORY 35 A Difference of Opinion 35 The Information Explanation 36 The Incumbent Efficiency Explanation 39 The Negative Advertising Theory 41 The Incumbent Behavior Explanation 42 Conclusion 43 End Notes 43 4 DATA AND METHODS 44 Incumbent and Challenger Spending 44 iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Instrumental Variables 48 Challenger Political Quality 51 Challenger Celebrity 54 State/District Partisanship and Ideology 54 Economic Variables 58 Incumbent-Centered Variables 59 Party 60 Estimation Procedures 60 Conclusion 62 End Notes 63 5 A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DATA 64 Challenger Political Quality 65 Challenger Expenditures 74 Incumbent Controversy and Scandal 76 Challenger Celebrity 80 Challenger Wealth 82 Conclusion 84 End Notes 84 6 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF SENATE ELECTIONS 85 OLS Results 86 2SLS Results 92 Partitioned Samples 97 High-Quality Challengers 101 Low-Quality Challengers 104 Conclusion 107 End Notes 108 7 REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF HOUSE ELECTIONS 109 OLS Results 110 2SLS Results 112 High-Quality Challengers 117 Low-Quality Challengers 120 Conclusion 124 End Notes 125 8 A LOOK BACK AND A LOOK FORWARD 126 The Theory 127 The Evidence 128 Future Research 131 Conclusion 134 End Notes 135 v Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. REFERENCES 136 APPENDICES A DEFINITION OF VARIABLES 144 B PARTISAN AND IDEOLOGICAL IDENTIFICATION 146 C INCUMBENT CONTROVERSY OR SCANDAL 148 D CELEBRITY CHALLENGERS 153 E REDUCED FORM EQUATIONS 156 F SAMPLE STATISTICS 160 VITA 162 vi Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Breakdown of Campaign Expenditures for 1990 House Races 4 1.2 Breakdown of Campaign Expenditures for 1990 Senate Races 5 1.3 The Growth of PAC Contributions to Congressional Candidates, 1974-94 9 1.4 Sources of Campaign Contributions to House and Senate Candidates, 1974-94 10 5.1 Average Expenditures by House and Senate Candidates, 1974-94 67 5.2 Average Expenditures by House Challengers-Previous Elective Office, 1974-94 68 5.3 Average Expenditures by Senate Challengers-Previous Elective Office, 1974-94 68 5.4 Winning Challengers in House Elections—Previous Elective Office, 1974-94 72 5.5 Winning Challengers in Senate Elections—Previous Elective Office, 1974-94 72 5.6 Challengers for House and Senate Campaigns-Previous Elective Office, 1974-94 73 5.7 Victories in Relation to Spending by House and Senate Challengers, 1974-94 75 5.8 Victories by Challengers in Campaigns Involving Incumbent Controversy or Scandal, 1974-94 78 5.9 Average Expenditures in Campaigns Involving Incumbent Controversy or Scandal, 1974-94 78 5.10 Victories by Celebrity Challengers in House and Senate Campaigns, 1974-94 81 5.11 Expenditures by Candidates in Campaigns with Celebrity Challengers, 1974-94 81 vii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. S. 12 Average Expenditures in Campaigns Involving Wealthy Challengers, 1974-94 83 6.1 OLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending-Senate 86 6.2 OLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending—Senate 88 6.3 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending—Senate 93 6.4 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending—Senate 94 6.5 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending—Senate Campaigns with High-Quality Challengers 102 6.6 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending—Senate Campaigns with Low-Quality Challengers 105 7.1 OLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending-House 110 7.2 OLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending-House 111 7.3 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending-House 113 7.4 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending-House 115 7.5 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending—House Campaigns with High-Quality Challengers 118 7.6 2SLS Regression of the Effects of Campaign Spending—House Campaigns with Low-Quality Challengers 121 A.1 Definition of Variables 144 B.l Partisan Identification in the United States 146 B.2 Ideological Identification in the United States 147 C. 1 House Campaigns Involving Incumbent Controversy or Scandal. 1974-94 148 C.2 Senate Campaigns Involving Incumbent Controversy or Scandal, 1974-94 152 viii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. D.l Celebrity Challengers in House Campaigns, 1974-94 153 D.2 Celebrity Challengers in Senate Campaigns, 1974-94 155