« Back to Results

Political Connections and Transfers

Paper Session

Monday, Jan. 4, 2021 3:45 PM - 5:45 PM (EST)

Hosted By: American Economic Association
  • Chair: Leonard Wantchekon, Princeton University

What Drives Corporate Elites' Campaign Contribution Behavior?

Edoardo Teso
,
Northwestern University

Abstract

Do U.S. corporate elites contribute to political campaigns purely motivated by ideological considerations – as typically assumed by the literature on individual donors’ drivers of contributions, – or are their donations also a tool of political influence? I investigate this question using a new panel on the contributions to Members of Congress (MCs) by 401,557 corporate leaders of 14,807 U.S. corporations over the 1999-2018 period. I investigate how donations vary over time as a function of MCs’ policy relevance for an individual’s company, measured through MCs’ assignment to committees dealing with policy issues relevant to the company. I find that the likelihood of donating increases by 11% when a MC becomes “policy relevant” to an individual’s company. The effect is driven by donations to MCs with the greatest power in the committees. The estimates suggest that (i) 13 percent of the observed gap in U.S. corporate elites’ donations to “policy relevant” versus other MCs is driven by an influence-seeking motive, and (ii) total corporate leaders’ donations that are driven by the influence-seeking motive amount to about 53% of the overall donations by their companies’ PACs over the same period.

Political Uncertainty, Market Structure and the Forms of State Capture

Nathan Canen
,
University of Houston
Rafael Ch
,
New York University
Leonard Wantchekon
,
Princeton University

Abstract

This paper studies when and why firms prefer more direct forms of state capture (i.e. without intermediaries, such as patronage or appointments to the bureaucracy) to more indirect ones (e.g. lobbying). Using a novel database on contractual arrangements between politicians, political brokers and businessmen in Benin, we find that an increase in political uncertainty is associated with an increase in direct forms of capture. We rationalize our findings through a principal-agent model under political uncertainty. Firms induce market distortions by making transfers to incumbents. Direct capture acts as an insurance for the firm, guaranteeing that its paid for distortions are kept in place even when the incumbent is displaced. We structurally estimate our model and show that policies thought to decrease state capture, such as improved bureaucrat selection, can have little to no effect once substitution towards indirect control is accounted for.

Sharecropping and Clientelism in Pakistan

Sabrin beg
,
University of Delaware

Abstract

Clientelist politics is widely perceived as both pervasive and detrimental to development and democracy. In contrast to vote-buying, it entails repeated interactions between patrons and clients, that is best captured by the political exchange between rural elites and their long-standing electorate involving insurance provision and income protection in return for political support. Exploiting Pakistan’s transition to federal democracy and tenant-level panel data, I demonstrate that elections resulted in higher sharecropping (risk-pooling agricultural contracts) by politician landlords—tenants of politicians received greater access to land for sharecropping and other private goods after the election, relative to other tenant households. I argue that while sharecropping allows landlord politicians to perpetuate power, the ability to use sharecropping as part of a clientelist exchange is lower when the efficiency cost of sharecropping is high. I construct a measure of exogenous technological change in agriculture that lowers incentives for sharecropping, and show that the change in technology reduced the likelihood of landlords’ election success in historically landlord-dominated areas.

Private Credit under Political Influence: Evidence from France

Anne-Laure Delatte
,
CNRS (Dauphine-Leda), CEPII, CEPR
Adrien Matray
,
Princeton University
Noemie Pinardon-Touati
,
HEC Paris

Abstract

Formally independent private banks change their supply of credit to the corporate sector for the constituencies of contested political incumbents in order to improve their reelection prospects. In return, politicians grant such banks access to the profitable market for loans to local public entities among their constituencies. We examine French credit registry data for 2007--2017 and find that credit granted to the private sector increases by 9%-14% in the year during which a powerful incumbent faces a contested election. In line with politicians returning the favor, banks that grant more credit to private firms in election years gain market share in the local public entity debt market after the election is held. Thus we establish that, if politicians can control the allocation of rents, then formal independence does not ensure the private sector's effective independence from politically motivated distortions.
JEL Classifications
  • H7 - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations
  • D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making