Pareto-Improving Campaign Finance Policy
- 1 May 2004
- journal article
- Published by American Economic Association in American Economic Review
- Vol. 94 (3) , 628-655
- https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828041464443
Abstract
This paper argues that campaign finance policy, in the form of contribution limits and matching public financing, can be Pareto improving even under very optimistic assumptions concerning the role of campaign advertising and the rationality of voters. The optimistic assumptions are that candidates use campaign contributions to convey truthful information to voters about their qualifications for office and that voters update their beliefs rationally on the basis of the information they have seen. The argument also assumes that campaign contributions are provided by interest groups and that candidates can offer to provide policy favors to attract higher contributions.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Mixed Equilibrium in a Downsian Model with a Favored CandidateJournal of Economic Theory, 2002
- A Model of Candidate Location When One Candidate Has a Valence AdvantageAmerican Journal of Political Science, 2001
- Congressional Campaign Spending and the Quality of DemocracyThe Journal of Politics, 2000
- Campaign expenditures, contributions and direct endorsements: The strategic use of information and money to influence voter behaviorEuropean Journal of Political Economy, 1997
- Electoral Competition with Informed and Uninformed VotersAmerican Political Science Review, 1994
- ELECTIONS AND THE THEORY OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS: A SURVEY AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS*Economics & Politics, 1992
- Strategic Politicians and the Dynamics of U.S. House Elections, 1946–86American Political Science Review, 1989
- Interest groups, campaign contributions, and probabilistic votingPublic Choice, 1987
- Menu Auctions, Resource Allocation, and Economic InfluenceThe Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1986
- Sequential EquilibriaEconometrica, 1982