IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buspol/v6y2004i03p1-34_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The (Sometimes Surprising) Consequences of Societally Unrepresentative Contributors on Legislative Responsiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Bailey, Michael

Abstract

The conventional view of private campaign contributions is that they distort policy to the detriment of society. Formal models consistent with such views, however, are based on restrictive assumptions about the nature of campaigns, interest groups and policy dimensionality. This paper relaxes those assumptions and allows for informative campaigns, multiple interest groups and multiple issue dimensions. It uses analytical and computational methods to demonstrate that private campaign contributions from societally unrepresentative contributors can, under reasonable conditions, improve social welfare. Multidimensionality is important because politicians need to be responsive on salient issues to prevent opponents from raising money based on less salient issues and using the money to publicize positions on salient issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Bailey, Michael, 2004. "The (Sometimes Surprising) Consequences of Societally Unrepresentative Contributors on Legislative Responsiveness," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 1-34, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buspol:v:6:y:2004:i:03:p:1-34_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1369525800000978/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dino Falaschetti, 2008. "Can Lobbying Prevent Anticompetitive Outcomes? Evidence On Consumer Monopsony In Telecommunications," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 1065-1096.
    2. Michael Ensley, 2012. "Incumbent positioning, ideological heterogeneity and mobilization in U.S. House elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 43-61, April.

    More about this item

    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:cup:buspol:v:6:y:2004:i:03:p:1-34_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bap .

    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.