ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

Public Support for Using Campaign Funds for Childcare

Gender
Representation
Social Policy
Social Welfare
USA
Campaign
Policy Implementation
Maria Wilson
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Maria Wilson
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Abstract

In the spring of 2018, the US Federal Election Commission ruled that “campaign funds may be used to pay for a candidate’s childcare expenses that are incurred as a direct result of campaign activity” (FEC ruling AO 2018-6). Since then, 29 US states have followed this federal ruling through ethics rulings and campaign finance legislation. Opponents of childcare related campaign finance reforms have argued that childcare is not a legitimate campaign expense and that campaign funds should not be used for personal expenses. Proponents of the reforms, however, argue that childcare is not a personal expense, but rather an integral part of the campaign the way any other campaign resource would be. Using an experimental research design with data from 2020 and 2023, I evaluate how the US public feels about candidate use of campaign funds on childcare. To my knowledge, this is the first public opinion dataset that examines state level candidates and campaign finance. Controlling for the gender and partisanship, and parenthood status of the candidates, respondents are shown one of four conditions. The control condition features a candidate who does not use campaign funds for childcare and has no mention of the state campaign finance regulations in the vignette. The results show that respondents are more likely to consider childcare a valid campaign expense when exposed to the candidate that uses funds for childcare while being provided with context regarding campaign finance regulations than respondents in the other conditions, including the control group. These findings indicate that when respondents see candidates using campaign funds for childcare and are given information about campaign finance regulations, it normalizes campaign funds for childcare as a legitimate expense. The findings of this paper call for a wider discussion of campaign finance reform in the United States and how childcare accessibility can contribute to making political office more attainable for parents, and particularly mothers of young children.