{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022867194371152155, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009674582233948988, 'mean_word_length': 5.733727810650888, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Do candidates benefit from rejecting PAC contributions? Evidence from a pre-registered candidate evaluation survey experiment

Despite the public's purported distaste for candidates supported by political action committees (PACs), they remain prominent in American electoral politics, with their total spending exceeding $582 million in the 2020 cycle. Does this dislike of PACs provide an opportunity for candidates to increase their likelihood of (re)election? Using a candidate evaluation survey experiment fielded as part of the 2020 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we investigate how the decision to accept or reject PAC contributions affects candidates' evaluation and voters' willingness to support their election efforts. We find that voters are more likely to vote for, donate to, and trust candidates that reject PAC contributions. Surprisingly we fail to find evidence of moderation by respondent's party ID. Republican and Democratic voters both penalize candidates that accept PAC money. This study is among the first to study how candidates' campaign financing choices influence their evaluation by voters.