Does Political Ambiguity Pay? Corporate Campaign Contributions and the Rewards to Legislator Reputation
Randall S. Kroszner
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
George Mason University - Buchanan Center Political Economy; CESifo (Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute for Economic Research)
NBER Working Paper No. w7475
Do politicians tend to follow a strategy of ambiguity in their policy positions or a strategy of reputational development to reduce uncertainty about where they stand? Ambiguity could allow a legislator to avoid alienating constituents and to play rival interests off against each other to maximize campaign contributions. Alternatively, reputational clarity could help to reduce uncertainty about a candidate and lead to high campaign contributions from favored interests. We outline a theory that considers conditions under which a politician would and would not prefer reputational development and policy-stance clarity in the context of repeat dealing with special interests. Our proxy for reputational development is the percent of repeat givers to a legislator. Using data on corporate political action committee contributions (PACs) to members of the U.S. House during the seven electoral cycles from 1983/84 to 1995/96, we find that legislators do not appear to follow a strategy of ambiguity and that high reputational development is rewarded with high PAC contributions.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 45working papers series
Date posted: March 15, 2000
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.672 seconds