How Internal Constraints Shape Interest Group Activities: Evidence from Access-Seeking PACs

Forthcoming, American Political Science Review

48 Pages Posted: 1 Nov 2017 Last revised: 6 Aug 2018

See all articles by Zhao Li

Zhao Li

Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs & Department of Politics

Date Written: August 3, 2018

Abstract

Interest groups contribute much less to campaigns than legally allowed. Consequently, prevailing theories infer these contributions must yield minimal returns. I argue constraints on PAC fundraising may also explain why interest groups give little. I illuminate one such constraint: access-seeking PACs rely on voluntary donations from affiliated individuals (e.g., employees), and these PACs alienate donors with partisan preferences when giving to the opposite party. First, difference-in-differences analysis of real giving shows donors withhold donations to access-seeking PACs when PACs contribute to out-partisan politicians. Next, an original survey of corporate PAC donors demonstrates they know how their PACs allocate contributions across parties, and replicates the observational study in an experiment. Donors' partisanship thus limits access-seeking PACs' fundraising and influence. This provides a new perspective on why there is little interest group money in elections, and has broad implications for how partisan preferences and other internal constraints shape interest group strategy.

Keywords: campaign finance, interest groups, business and politics, partisanship, polarization, political behavior

Suggested Citation

Li, Zhao, How Internal Constraints Shape Interest Group Activities: Evidence from Access-Seeking PACs (August 3, 2018). Forthcoming, American Political Science Review, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3062836 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3062836

Zhao Li (Contact Author)

Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs & Department of Politics

Princeton, NJ
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
370
Abstract Views
2,636
Rank
148,775
PlumX Metrics