External Relations Sub-Pages

Do Public Funding Programs Enhance Electoral Competition?

For the first part of this study, the authors examine Maine and Arizona, the states that have already enacted “clean election” laws, or taxpayer financed campaigns.  They ask the questions: “Does public financing work?” and “Does it achieve the goals that are put forth as justification?”   The authors also analyze the four arguments advocates of public financing often rely on.  The authors first explain why public funding would work, in theory; followed by why it does not fully work.  They do this by addressing the congressional reports, campaign finance legislation and data on electoral competition.

Filed Under: Research, Tax Financed Campaigns Research, Tax-Financing, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, f, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Arizona, Maine

Perceptions of Corruption and Campaign Finance: When Public Opinion Determines Constitutional Law

In this article, authors Nathaniel Persily and Kelli Lammie, test the empirical assumptions about American public opinion found in the Supreme Court’s opinions in campaign finance jurisprudence. The area of campaign finance is a unique one in First Amendment law because the Court has allowed the mere perception of a problem (in this case, corruption) […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Faulty Assumptions, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Money in Politics, Research, Buckley v. Valeo, Confidence in Government, First Amendment, Kelly Lammie, McConnell v. FEC, money in politics, Nathaniel Persily, Public Corruption, Public Opinion Polling, Supreme Court, Contribution Limits, Faulty Assumptions, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Contributions & Limits, Faulty Assumptions, Jurisprudence & Litigation

Testimony of CCP Chairman Bradley A. Smith to the Committee on Rules and Administration

Written testimony of CCP Chairman Bradley A. Smith at a July 14, 2004 hearing of the Committee on Rules and Administration on the topic of enforcement procedures at the FEC and disclosure relative to campaign finance.

Filed Under: Blog, External Relations Comments and Testimony, External Relations Sub-Pages, Federal, Federal Comments and Testimony, Uncategorized, Comments and Testimony

Did Firms Profit from Soft Money?

This paper uses event study methodology to measure whether firms that gave soft money to political parties received excessively high rates of returns from their contributions.

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Research, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Political Parties

Testimony of CCP Chairman Bradley A. Smith to the Committee on House Administration

Written testimony of CCP Chairman Bradley A. Smith at an October 16, 2003 hearing of the Committee on House Administration on the topic of enforcement procedures at the FEC.

Filed Under: Blog, External Relations Comments and Testimony, External Relations Sub-Pages, Federal, Federal Comments and Testimony, Uncategorized, Comments and Testimony

This Is Reform? Predicting the Impact of the New Campaign Financing Regulations

McCain-style campaign finance regulation is the new campaign reality. But what exactly will this reformist utopia look like? Assessing the “reformed” campaign of the future against the stated desires and expectations of the principal campaign finance regulators and their media supporters, this paper predicts the most important changes in political campaigning, changes that will be experienced for the first time during the 2003–04 electoral cycle.

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Research, Contribution Limits, Political Committees & 527s, Contributions & Limits, Political Committees & 527s

Does Cleanliness Lead to Competitiveness? The Failure of Maine’s Experiment with Taxpayer Financing of Campaigns

On November 5, 1996, voters passed the Maine Clean Election Act by ballot initiative. That was the first piece of state or federal legislation to offer taxpayer financing to state-level candidates who voluntarily accept spending limits and refuse private contributions. The legislation applied to state senate and house candidates beginning with the 2000 primary and […]

Filed Under: Research, Tax Financed Campaigns Research, Tax-Financing, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Cato Institute, Maine Clean Election Act, Martin Zelder, Patrick Basham, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Maine

Government Financing of Campaigns: Public Choice and Public Values

In this policy briefing, John Samples argues against the notions that taxpayer financed campaigns would increase the integrity of elections and lawmaking, political equality, and electoral competitiveness. One of the popular arguments in support of government financed campaigns is that they will reduce the incidence of corruption. Samples opines that taxpayer financed campaigns are themselves corrupt, as public funds are used to serve private interests. He also rebukes the argument that the public favors the rhetorically-challenged message of “clean elections” and “reform.” Ultimately, Samples’ analysis demonstrates why the efforts of the “reformers” are likely to fail.

Filed Under: Research, Tax Financed Campaigns Research, Tax-Financing, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Faulty Assumptions, Faulty Assumptions, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns

Why is there So Little Money in U.S. Politics?

Thirty years ago, Gordon Tullock posed a provocative puzzle: considering the value of public policies at stake and the reputed influence of campaign contributions in policy-making, why is there so little money in U.S. politics? In this paper, the authors argue that campaign contributions are not a form of policy-buying, but are rather a form of political participation and consumption.

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Research, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits

Is Cleanliness Political Godliness?: Arizona’s Clean Elections Law after Its First Year

This report analyzes the effects of the Citizens Clean Elections Act after its first election cycle to determine its impact on the competitiveness of legislative races in 2000. The report also explores whether accepting public subsidies caused legislators to vote differently from legislators who continued to accept private support. Finally, this report comments on the concerns that are raised by an expansion of campaign finance regulation and subsidies like the Clean Elections Act.  The author concludes that given the program’s negligible impact, its cost, and its infringement of First Amendment rights, the Clean Elections system should be repealed.

Filed Under: Research, Tax Financed Campaigns Research, Tax-Financing, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Uncategorized, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Arizona

The Center for Competitive Politics is now the Institute for Free Speech.