THE MARKET FOR LEGISLATIVE INFLUENCE OVER REGULATORY POLICY

被引:1
作者
de Figueiredo, Rui J. P., Jr. [1 ,2 ]
Edwards, Geoff [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Berkeley, Haas Sch Business, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[2] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Polit Sci, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[3] Charles River Associates Inc, European & Asia Pacific Competit Practices, London, England
[4] Charles River Associates Inc, European & Asia Pacific Competit Practices, Sydney, NSW, Australia
来源
STRATEGY BEYOND MARKETS | 2016年 / 34卷
关键词
Non-market strategy; campaign finance; political economy; telecommunications regulation; regulation; political institutions; UNITED-STATES-HOUSE; CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS; POLITICAL CONTROL; PAC CONTRIBUTIONS; INTERESTS; MONEY; PREFERENCES; COMPETITION; VARIABLES; BUY;
D O I
10.1108/S0742-332220160000034007
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
We show that, in the US telecommunications industry, market participants have a sophisticated understanding of the political process, and behave strategically in their allocation of contributions to state legislators as if seeking to purchase influence over regulatory policy. We find that interests respond defensively to contributions from rivals, take into account the configuration of support available to them in both the legislature and the regulatory commission, and vary their contributions according to variations in relative costs for influence by different legislatures. This strategic behavior supports a theory that commercially motivated interests contribute campaign resources in order to mobilize legislators to influence the decisions of regulatory agencies. We also report evidence that restrictions on campaign finance do not affect all interests equally. The paper therefore provides positive evidence on the nature and effects of campaign contributions in regulated industries where interest group competition may be sharp.
引用
收藏
页码:193 / 232
页数:40
相关论文
共 89 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1991, ECON POLIT-OXFORD
[2]   Why is there so little money in US politics? [J].
Ansolabehere, S ;
de Figueiredo, JM ;
Snyder, JM .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2003, 17 (01) :105-130
[3]  
Ansolabehere S., 2002, Business and Politics, V4, P131
[4]  
AUSTENSMITH D, 1992, SOC CHOICE WELFARE, V9, P229
[5]   COUNTERACTIVE LOBBYING [J].
AUSTENSMITH, D ;
WRIGHT, JR .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1994, 38 (01) :25-44
[6]   Theories of strategic nonmarket participation: Majority-rule and executive institutions [J].
Baron, DP .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, 2001, 10 (01) :47-89
[7]   MENU AUCTIONS, RESOURCE-ALLOCATION, AND ECONOMIC INFLUENCE [J].
BERNHEIM, BD ;
WHINSTON, MD .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1986, 101 (01) :1-31
[8]   Votes or money? Theory and evidence from the US Congress [J].
Bombardini, Matilde ;
Trebbi, Francesco .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2011, 95 (7-8) :587-611
[9]   PROBLEMS WITH INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLES ESTIMATION WHEN THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE INSTRUMENTS AND THE ENDOGENOUS EXPLANATORY VARIABLE IS WEAK [J].
BOUND, J ;
JAEGER, DA ;
BAKER, RM .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 90 (430) :443-450
[10]   A THEORY OF POLITICAL CONTROL AND AGENCY DISCRETION [J].
CALVERT, RL ;
MCCUBBINS, MD ;
WEINGAST, BR .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1989, 33 (03) :588-611