A RE‐EXAMINATION OF THE ROLE OF MONEY IN CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS: OPEN SEAT ELECTIONS FROM 1982–1992

Abstract

This essay analyzes the applicability of the conventional understanding of the role of money in elections for the House of Representatives. While the conventional wisdom is not incorrect, it is better viewed as incomplete. A substantial body of literature exists investigating the role of challenger's, incumbent's and open seat candidate's campaign expenditures on the probability of electoral success. The thrust of the research has been on incumbent/challenger races for the House of Representatives. The research presented here focuses on open seat races to avoid the cumbersome, albeit interesting and substantial, impact of incumbency. Money is an important factor, here the conventional wisdom is correct, but its effect is neither all‐encompassing nor static; the impact varies with differing situations. In addition, relative campaign expenditures are more significant than the literature would lead one to believe. Individual campaign expenditures are consequential but of more importance is relative campaign expenditure. The levels of aggregate spending are meaningful, but of more importance are differentials in expenditures. One must comprehend that the impact of campaign expenditures varies with district‐specific factors and that disparities in campaign expenditures are substantial in understanding the role of money in congressional elections.