Abstract
During the last several elections, numerous high-profile candidates for the U.S. Senate have raised a majority of their campaign funds from donors who reside in a different state. These efforts have garnered substantial media coverage and have been fodder for attacks by the candidate’s opponents. Despite the increased attention to the role of out-of-state donors, it is not clear if these cases are outliers or if this is now common practice in our more nationalized electoral environment. In this paper, we examine trends in Senate candidate’s fundraising from out-of-state donors between 2000 and 2020. We find that there has been a general increase over time in Senate candidates’ reliance on out-of-state donations. There is, however, variation in terms of who relies heavily upon the support of a more national donor base. A Senate candidate’s share of out-of-state donations varies with factors like incumbency, electoral competition, and geography.
References
Ansolabehere, S., J. M. De Figueiredo, and J. M. SnyderJr. 2003. “Why Is There So Little Money in US Politics?” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 17 (1): 105–30. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533003321164976.Search in Google Scholar
Baker, A. E. 2020. “The Partisan and Policy Motivations of Political Donors Seeking Surrogate Representation in House Elections.” Political Behavior 42 (4): 1035–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09531-2.Search in Google Scholar
Barber, M. J., B. Canes-Wrone, and S. Thrower. 2017. “Ideologically Sophisticated Donors: Which Candidates Do Individual Contributors Finance?” American Journal of Political Science 61 (2): 271–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12275.Search in Google Scholar
Barber, M. J. 2016. “Representing the Preferences of Donors, Partisans, and Voters in the US Senate.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80 (S1): 225–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw004.Search in Google Scholar
Canes-Wrone, B., and K. M. Miller. 2022. “Out-of-District Donors and Representation in the US House.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 47 (2): 361–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12336.Search in Google Scholar
Carson, J. L., J. Sievert, and R. D Williamson. 2020. “Nationalization and the Incumbency Advantage.” Political Research Quarterly 73 (1): 156–68.10.1177/1065912919883696Search in Google Scholar
Carson, J. L., J. Sievert, and R. D. Williamson. 2023. Nationalized Politics: Evaluating Electoral Politics Across Time. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780197669655.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Cox, G. W., and J. N. Katz. 1996. “Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in US House Elections Grow?” American Journal of Political Science 40 (2): 478–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111633.Search in Google Scholar
Culberson, T., M. P. McDonald, and S. M. Robbins. 2019. “Small Donors in Congressional Elections.” American Politics Research 47 (5): 970–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x18763918.Search in Google Scholar
Darr, J. P., M. P. Hitt, and J. L. Dunaway. 2018. “Newspaper Closures Polarize Voting Behavior.” Journal of Communication 68 (6): 1007–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy051.Search in Google Scholar
Ensley, M. J. 2009. “Individual Campaign Contributions and Candidate Ideology.” Public Choice 138 (1): 221–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-008-9350-6.Search in Google Scholar
Fenno, R. F. 1977. “US House Members in Their Constituencies: An Exploration.” American Political Science Review 71 (3): 883–917. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055400265143.Search in Google Scholar
Gimpel, J. G., F. E. Lee, and J. Kaminski. 2006. “The Political Geography of Campaign Contributions in American Politics.” The Journal of Politics 68 (3): 626–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00450.x.Search in Google Scholar
Gimpel, J. G., F. E. Lee, and S. Pearson-Merkowitz. 2008. “The Check is in the Mail: Interdistrict Funding Flows in Congressional Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (2): 373–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00318.x.Search in Google Scholar
Hopkins, D. J. 2018. The Increasingly United States: How and Why American Political Behavior Nationalized. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226530406.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Jacobson, G. C. 1989. “Strategic Politicians and the Dynamics of US House Elections, 1946–86.” American Political Science Review 83 (3): 773–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/1962060.Search in Google Scholar
Keena, A. 2019. “Who Needs the Wealthy? the Effects of Size Scaling on Money in Senate Elections.” Congress and the Presidency 46 (2): 235–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2019.1572673.Search in Google Scholar
Lee, F. E. 2016. Insecure Majorities: Congress and the Perpetual Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226409184.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Maestas, C. D., and C. R. Rugeley. 2008. “Assessing the ‘Experience Bonus’ through Examining Strategic Entry, Candidate Quality, and Campaign Receipts in U.S. House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (3): 520–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00327.x.Search in Google Scholar
Moskowitz, D. J. 2021. “Local News, Information, and the Nationalization of US Elections.” American Political Science Review 115 (2): 114–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055420000829.Search in Google Scholar
Mutz, D. C. 1995. “Effects of Horse-Race Coverage on Campaign Coffers: Strategic Contributing in Presidential Primaries.” The Journal of Politics 57 (4): 1015–42. https://doi.org/10.2307/2960400.Search in Google Scholar
Reckhow, S., J. R. Henig, R. Jacobsen, and J. A. Litt. 2017. “‘Outsiders with Deep Pockets’: The Nationalization of Local School Board Elections.” Urban Affairs Review 53 (5): 783–811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087416663004.Search in Google Scholar
Schiller, W. J. 2000. Partners and Rivals: Representation in US Senate Delegations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691223919Search in Google Scholar
Sievert, J., and S. C. McKee. 2019. “Nationalization in US Senate and Gubernatorial Elections.” American Politics Research 47 (5): 1055–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x18792694.Search in Google Scholar
Sievert, J., and R. D. Williamson. 2022. “Elections, Competition, and Constituent Evaluations of US Senators.” Electoral Studies 75 (2022): 102424.10.1016/j.electstud.2021.102424Search in Google Scholar
Westlye, M. C. 1991. Senate Elections and Campaign Intensity. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
