The impact of campaign expenditures on political competition in the French legislative elections of 1993

Abstract

We use regression analysis to estimate the effect that campaign money had on the votes of challengers and incumbents in the 1993 elections to the French legislative assembly. Incumbent candidates can at best expect to win 1.01% of the popular vote for each extra franc they spend per registered voter in their district. Challengers can expect to win at least twice as much as this. Simulations show that if campaign spending ceilings were halved, incumbents would have gained an extra ten percent of the popular vote over their closest challenging rivals. The regression analysis also suggests that voters react negatively to candidates who rely heavily on their own money for their outlays and reward candidates who rely on contributions from private individuals. These results suggest that campaign spending ceilings may inhibit political competition, and that voters may resist a candidate who relies on narrow sources of funding.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Abramovitz, A.I. and Segal, J.A. (1992). Senate elections. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Drysch, T. (1993). The new French system of political finance. In: A.B. Gunlicks (Ed.), Campaign and party finance in North America and Western Europe, pp. 155–177. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fair, R.C. (1996). Econometrics and presidential elections. Journal of Economic Perspectives 10: 89–102.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Green, D.P. and 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.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Green, D.P. and Krasno, J.S. (1990). Rebuttal to Jacobson's ‘New evidence for old arguments’. American Journal of Political Science 90: 363–372.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jacobson, G.C. (1990). The effect of campaign spending in House elections: New evidence for old arguments. American Journal of Political Science 90: 334–362.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jacobson, G.C. (1985). Money and votes reconsidered: Congressional elections 1972–1982. Public Choice 47: 7–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jacobson, G.C. (1978). The effects of electoral campaign spending in congressional elections. American Political Science Review 72: 469–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Levitt, S.D. (1994). Using repeated challengers to estimate the effect of campaign spending on election outcomes in the U.S. House. Journal of Political Economy 102: 777–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Palda, F. (1996). Resolving the campaign spending limit debate. ENAP working paper, 1996.

  11. Palda, F. (1994). How much is your vote worth? San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Palda, F. (1993). Desirability and effects of campaign spending limits. Crime, Law and Social Change 4: 57–78.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Palda, F. and Palda, K. (1991). Campaign spending and campaign finance issues. Journal des économistes et des études humaines, June–September: 291–314.

  14. Palda, F. and Palda, K. (1985). Ceilings on campaign spending: Hypothesis and partial test with Canadian data. Public Choice 45: 313–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Palda, K. (1975). The effect of expenditure on political success. Journal of Law and Economics December 1975: 745–771.

  16. Palda, K. (1973). Does advertising influence votes? An analysis of the 1966 and 1970 Quebec elections. Canadian Journal of Political Science 6: 638–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Palda, F., Palda, K. The impact of campaign expenditures on political competition in the French legislative elections of 1993. Public Choice 94, 157 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004942118179

Download citation

Keywords

  • Public Choice
  • Marginal Product
  • Political Competition
  • Popular Vote
  • Campaign Spending