How prices matter in politics: the returns to campaign advertising
- Thomas Stratmann
- … show all 1 hide
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
The apparent ineffectiveness of incumbent campaign spending in congressional elections is one of the enduring puzzles in the political economy literature. Previous work in this area has assumed that advertising prices are uniform across congressional districts, and therefore that campaign spending alone is a good proxy for campaign advertising. However, candidates in different districts face widely different advertising prices and this paper shows that differences in advertising costs are one source of the apparent ineffectiveness of campaign spending. Accounting for the price of advertising, this paper shows that campaign spending is productive for both incumbents and challengers.
- Abrajano, M. A., & Morton, R. B. (2004). All style and no substance? The strategic calculus of campaign advertising. Mimeo, New York University.
- Abramowitz, A. I. (1988). Explaining Senate election outcomes. American Political Science Review, 82, 385–403. CrossRef
- Abramowitz, A. I. (1991). Incumbency, campaign spending, and the decline of competition in U.S. House elections. Journal of Politics, 53, 34–56. CrossRef
- Ansolabehere, S., & Gerber, A. (1994). The mismeasure of campaign spending: evidence from the 1990 U.S. House elections. Journal of Politics, 56(4), 1106–1118. CrossRef
- Atkin, C., & Heald, G. (1976). Effects of political advertising. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 216–228. CrossRef
- Atkin, C., Bowen, L., Nayman, O. B., & Sheinkopf, K. G. (1973). Quality versus quantity in televised political ads. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37, 209–224. CrossRef
- Ballotti, R. J., & Kaid, L. L. (2000). Examining verbal style in presidential campaign spots. Communication Studies, 51, 258–273.
- Benoit, W. L., Pier, P. M., & Blaney, J. R. (1997). A functional approach to televised political spots: Acclaiming, attacking, defending. Communication Quarterly, 45, 1–20.
- Bowen, L. (1994). Time of voting decision and use of political advertising: The Slate Gorton-Brock Adams senatorial campaign. Journalism Quarterly, 71(3), 665–675.
- Brians, C. L., & Wattenberg, M. P. (1996). Campaign issue knowledge and salience: Comparing reception from tv commercials, tv news and newspapers. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 172–193. CrossRef
- Coates, D. (1998). Additional incumbent spending really can harm (at least some) incumbents: an analysis of vote share maximization. Public Choice, 95(1–2), 63–87. CrossRef
- Erikson, R. S., & Palfrey, T. R. (1998). Campaign spending and incumbency: an alternative simultaneous equations approach. Journal of Politics, 60, 355–373. CrossRef
- Feldman, P., & Jondrow, J. (1984). Congressional elections and local federal spending. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 147–163. CrossRef
- Fritz, S., & Morris, D. (1992). Handbook of campaign spending. Washington: Congressional Quarterly Press.
- Gerber, A. (1998). Estimating the effect of campaign spending on election outcomes using instrumental variables. American Political Science Review, 92, 401–411. CrossRef
- Goldstein, K., & Freedman, P. (2000). New evidence for new arguments: Money and advertising in the 1996 Senate elections. Journal of Politics, 62, 1087–1108.
- Goldstein, K., & Rivlin, J. (2005). Political advertising in 2002. Combined file [dataset]. Final release. Madison, WI: The Wisconsin Advertising Project, The Department of Political Science at The University of Wisconsin—Madison.
- Goldstein, K., Franz, M., & Ridout, T. (2002). Political advertising in 2000. Combined file [dataset]. Final release. Madison, WI: The Department of Political Science at The University of Wisconsin—Madison and The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.
- Green, D. P., & Krasno, J. S. (1988). Salvation for the spendthrift incumbent: reestimating the effects of campaign spending in House elections. American Journal of Political Science, 32, 884–907. CrossRef
- Grier, K. (1989). Campaign spending and Senate elections, 1978–1984. Public Choice, 63(3), 201–220. CrossRef
- Herrnson, P. (2004). Congressional elections: campaigning at home and in Washington (4th edn.). Washington: CQ Press.
- Jacobson, G. C. (1978). The effects of campaign spending on Congressional elections. American Political Science Review, 72, 469–491. CrossRef
- Jacobson, G. C. (1980). Money in congressional elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
- Jacobson, G. C. (1985). Money and votes reconsidered: Congressional elections 1972–1982. Public Choice, 47, 7–62. CrossRef
- Jacobson, G. C. (1989). Strategic politicians and the dynamics of House elections, 1946–1986. American Political Science Review, 83, 773–793. CrossRef
- Jacobson, G. C., & Kernell, S. (1983). Strategy and choice in congressional elections (2nd edn.). New Haven: Yale University Press.
- Jasperson, A. E., & Fan, D. P. (2002). An aggregate examination of the backlash effect in political advertising: the case of the 1996 U.S. Senate race in Minnesota. Journal of Advertising, 31(1), 1–12.
- Kaid, L. L. (1982). Paid television advertising and candidate name identification. Campaigns and Elections, 3, 34–36.
- Kaid, L. L. (Ed.). (2004). Handbook of political communication research. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Kaid, L. L., Gobetz, R. H., Garner, J., Leland, C. M., & Scott, D. K. (1993). Television news and presidential campaigns: the legitimization of television political advertising. Social Science Quarterly, 74(2), 274–285.
- Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46, 107–112. CrossRef
- Levitt, S. D. (1994). Using repeat challengers to estimate the effect of campaign spending on election outcomes in the U.S. House. Journal of Political Economy, 102, 777–798. CrossRef
- Milyo, J. (2001). What do candidates maximize (and why should anyone care)? Public Choice, 109(1/2), 119–139. CrossRef
- Mueller, D. C. (2003). Public choice III. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Ragsdale, L., & Cook, T. E. (1987). Representatives’ actions and challengers’ reactions: Limits to candidate connections in the House. American Journal of Political Science, 31, 45–81. CrossRef
- Shaw, D. R. (1999). The effect of TV ads and candidate appearance on statewide presidential votes, 1988–1996. American Political Science Review, 93, 345–362. CrossRef
- Simon, A. (2002). The winning message: candidate behavior, campaign discourse, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Spiliotes, C. J., & Vavreck, L. (2002). Campaign advertising: partisan convergence or divergence. Journal of Politics, 64(1), 249–261.
- Stratmann, T. (2006). Contribution limits and the effectiveness of campaign spending. Public Choice, 129(3–4), 461–474. CrossRef
- Squire, P. (1989). Competition and uncontested seats in the U.S. House election. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 14(2), 281–295. CrossRef
- Vavreck, L. (2001). The reasoning voter meets the strategic candidate: Signals and specificity in campaign advertising, 1998. American Politics Research, 29(5), 507–529. CrossRef
- Wald, A. (1940). The fitting of straight lines if both variables are subject to error. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 11, 284–300. CrossRef
- West, D. (2005). Air wars: television advertising in election campaigns, 1952–2004 (4th edn.). Washington: CQ Press.
- How prices matter in politics: the returns to campaign advertising
Volume 140, Issue 3-4 , pp 357-377
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Campaign advertising
- Campaign spending
- Industry Sectors
- Thomas Stratmann (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. George Mason University, Fairfax, USA