Affiliation:
1. Trinity College Dublin
Abstract
Positive effects of campaign spending on electoral outcomes have been found in several comparative, multiparty contexts, but very few of these systems use proportional representation. The few studies examining spending effects in multiparty elections have found that incumbent spending is no less effective than challenger spending, contrary to the vast bulk of empirical literature drawn from single-member district contexts. This study reexamines incumbent—challenger differences in spending effects under the single transferable vote. Examining the Irish general elections of 2002, the authors find a positive and statistically significant relationship between spending and votes. Candidates that spend more win more votes, and outspending one’s rivals means winning more of the vote share. Spending more also directly increases a candidate’s chance of winning a seat. Finally, incumbent spending is considerably less effective than spending by challengers from other parties but no less effective than spending by challengers from a candidate’s own party.
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference40 articles.
1. Explaining Senate Election Outcomes
2. Incumbency, Campaign Spending, and the Decline of Competition in U.S. House Elections
3. Alford, John, and David Brady. 1993. Persona and partisan advantages in U.S. congressional elections, 1846-1990. In Congress reconsidered , ed. L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer, 5th ed. 141-57. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
4. The Mismeasure of Campaign Spending: Evidence from the 1990 U.S. House Elections
Cited by
49 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献