This book systematically explores the relationship between party funding and corruption, and addresses fundamental concerns in the continued consideration of how democracy should function. The book analyses whether parties funded primarily through private donations are necessarily more corrupt than those funded by the state, and whether different types of corruption are evident in different funding regimes. Drawing on a comparison of Great Britain and Denmark, the author argues that levels of state subsidy are, in fact, unrelated to the type of corruption found. Subsidies are not a cure for corruption or, importantly, perceived corruption, so if they are to be introduced or sustained, this should be done for other reasons. Subsidies can, for example, be justified on grounds of public utility. Meanwhile, anti-corruption measures should focus on other regulations, but even then we should not expect such measures to impact on perceptions of corruption in the short term.

This handbook provides a general description of the different models of political finance regulations and analyses the relationship between party funding and effective democracy. The most important part of the book is an extensive matrix on political finance laws and regulations for about 100 countries. Public funding regulations, ceilings on campaign expenditure, bans on foreign donations and enforcing an agency are some of the issues covered in the study. Includes regional studies and discusses how political funding can affect women and men differently, and the delicate issue of monitoring, control and enforcement of political finance laws.

Scrutinizing a relatively new field of study, the Handbook of Political Party Funding assesses the basic assumptions underlying the research, presenting an unequalled variety of case studies from diverse political finance systems.

One of the most troubling critiques of contemporary democracy is the inability of representative governments to regulate the deluge of money in politics. If it is impossible to conceive of democracies without elections, it is equally impractical to imagine elections without money. Costs of Democracy is an exhaustive, ground-breaking study of money in Indian politics that opens readers’ eyes to the opaque and enigmatic ways in which money flows through the political veins of the world’s largest democracy. Through original, in-depth investigation—drawing from extensive fieldwork on political campaigns, pioneering surveys, and innovative data analysis—the contributors in this volume uncover the institutional and regulatory contexts governing the torrent of money in politics; the sources of political finance; the reasons for such large spending; and how money flows, influences, and interacts with different tiers of government. The book raises uncomfortable questions about whether the flood of money risks washing away electoral democracy itself.

Analysing political corruption as a distinct but separate entity from bureaucratic corruption, this timely book separates these two very different social phenomena in a way that is often overlooked in contemporary studies. Chapters argue that political corruption includes two basic, critical and related processes: extractive and power-preserving corruption.

On cover & title page: Integrated project "Making democratic institutions work"

In recent decades, and particularly since the US Supreme Court’s controversial Citizens United decision, lawmakers and other elites have told Americans that stricter campaign finance laws are needed to improve faith in the elections process, increase trust in the government, and counter cynicism toward politics. But as David M. Primo and Jeffrey D. Milyo argue, politicians and the public alike should reconsider the conventional wisdom in light of surprising and comprehensive empirical evidence to the contrary. Primo and Milyo probe original survey data to determine Americans’ sentiments on the role of money in politics, what drives these sentiments, and why they matter. What Primo and Milyo find is that while many individuals support the idea of reform, they are also skeptical that reform would successfully limit corruption, which Americans believe stains almost every fiber of the political system. Moreover, support for campaign finance restrictions is deeply divided along party lines, reflecting the polarization of our times. Ultimately, Primo and Milyo contend, American attitudes toward money in politics reflect larger fears about the health of American democracy, fears that will not be allayed by campaign finance reform.

Based on two international conferences at Princeton University and the Central European University, this is a handy guide to the problem of corruption in transition countries, with an important comparative content. Political Corruption in Transition is distinguished from similar publications by at least two features: by the quality of the carefully selected and edited essays ans by its original treatment. Instead of the usual preaching and excommunications, this Skeptic`s Handbook represents down-to-earth realism. Combines general issues with case studies and original research. The geographic coverage is wide, though it is ideas rather than a geography that drive the volume`s organization.

One characteristic of Central and Eastern European democracies in transition is the lack of stability in terms of accountability and transparency in practices of political party financing. This key volume provides a thorough and well-structured post-communist study of political finance, election campaign and party funding issues within this region, focusing specifically on Central and Eastern European countries. It outlines best practices for political party and election campaign financing, discusses the shortcomings of political funding schemes and highlights the scandals that emerge under investigation. Providing an illuminating analysis of how current regulations of political finance succeed in controlling the rise of political corruption, the volume will be indispensable for anyone interested in the efficiency of regulation in party funding.

An illuminating perspective on the polarizing effects of campaign finance reform