Public Opinion on Private Funding of Public Elections
Americans are wary of private election-administration funding, while arguments for and against bans produce only modest changes in opinion.
Why It Matters
The publication begins with a motivating question: What does the American public think about private funding of election administration, and can prominent pro-ban or anti-ban arguments change those opinions?
Its central contribution is to show that americans are wary of private election-administration funding, while arguments for and against bans produce only modest changes in opinion.
The study informs debates in states considering whether to ban, regulate, or permit private donations to election administrators.
Key Findings
- Americans are more wary than supportive of private funding for election administration, with substantial support for both bans and regulation.
- Very few respondents support allowing private election-administration donations without regulation.
- A large share of respondents remain undecided about the issue.
- The anti-ban argument has a small persuasive effect, while the tested pro-ban argument has little consistent effect.
Research Design
- Design
- Random assignment to pro-ban, anti-ban, both-argument, or no-argument experimental conditions identifies the persuasive effects of the tested arguments.
- Data
- The American Social Survey fielded by NORC, August 1-9, 2024 (1,031 American adults); Post-election Cooperative Election Study survey fielded by YouGov in November 2024 (2,000 American adults)
- Geography
- United States
- Time Period
- August and November 2024
- Unit of Analysis
- Individual American adult survey respondent
- Methods
- Two survey experiments randomly assigned respondents to receive a pro-ban argument, an anti-ban argument, both arguments, or neither argument.; Weighted comparisons of response distributions and regression models estimated treatment effects before and after the 2024 election.
Full Abstract
More than half of American states have sharply limited or banned private donations to public entities for the purpose of supporting election administration. Such legislation is largely consistent with public opinion: Americans are more wary than supportive of such funding, with support for outright bans about as strong as support for regulation, leaving very few who endorse an unregulated, laissez-faire approach. There is, however, a good-sized pool of undecided individuals, who might be nudged into the pro- or anti-ban camps by persuasive arguments. Our evidence, however, is that neither the main pro- nor the main anti- argument vetted in debates to date moves opinion dramatically, though the anti-ban argument might be a little more effective.
Citation
Gaines, Brian J., James G. Gimpel, and Andrew Reeves. 2026. "Public Opinion on Private Funding of Public Elections." State and Local Government Review, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X261469253.
- Venue
- State and Local Government Review
- Pages
- 1-9
- DOI
- 10.1177/0160323X261469253