Research

Publications

"Candidate Wealth and Early Money in Congressional Elections." With Danielle Thomsen. Accepted at the American Journal of Political Science.

Congress is widely known to be a "Millionaires’ Club," yet the ways in which wealthy candidates are advantaged in their pursuit of office have remained vague. We draw on new data on the assets of over 6,000 nonincumbent U.S. House candidates and examine why rich candidates are more likely to be elected. We find, first, that wealthier candidates fare far better in the early money chase. In addition, the subsequent return on large contributions, which wealthy candidates secure more of, is sizable. Third, candidates are more likely to drop out when they face a rich competitor. We then explore the connections between candidate and donor wealth and show that wealthy candidates are propelled by large donors in the first weeks of the campaign when networks tend to matter most. Our findings point to the myriad benefits that come with being wealthy and demonstrate why representational inequalities persist.

"A Bigger Tent? Nonwhite Republican Candidates and their Uphill Paths to Office." Political Research Quarterly.

Black, Latino, and Asian-American candidates have disproportionately ran as Democrats in the modern political era. Yet the number of nonwhite Republican candidates for U.S. Congress reached a record high of 260 in 2022, nearly tripling the number who ran in 2016. I utilize a candidate-level dataset to provide the first account of who these nonwhite Republican candidates for Congress are, where they run, and how they fare both electorally and financially. I find that despite increases in the number of nonwhite Republicans who run for office, these candidates are not well positioned to win. In comparison to their white counterparts, nonwhite Republicans are less experienced candidates who run in unfavorable districts and raise less money. Additionally, I employ an original survey of 2022 congressional candidates and find that nonwhite Republicans report facing greater institutional and electoral hurdles than white Republicans. Overall, these findings further our understanding of how the barriers to political representation may differ across social groups, while highlighting the enduring limitations that the Republican Party faces in broadening its electoral tent. 

"Grads Teach Grads: Student-Led Workshops to Complement Department Graduate Methods Offerings.” With Jacob Sutherland, Alisson Rowland, and Elane Westfaul. Journal of Political Science Education.

Political science PhD program research and teaching methods training are not created equal. Departments vary in the structure and content of their methods curricula. As a result, graduate students may find themselves taking methods training less directly aligned with their research or seeking out supplementary training on their own. In this article, we suggest one possible approach for departments to enhance training opportunities for their students: graduate student-led methods workshops. In these workshops, advanced graduate students develop and present a workshop on a research or teaching method they are familiar with and regularly use. This article presents an overview of a trial run of a workshop series at a political science PhD program, and provides a practical analysis of the strengths and limitations of such a workshop program.

Work in Progress

"Inherited Influence: The Political Giving of Billionaire Heirs."

Billionaires have become central players in American politics, but with wealth concentrated among the elderly, the political influence of their heirs warrants closer examination. Using an original dataset linking two editions of the Forbes 400 to their children, I analyze the campaign contribution patterns of billionaire heirs. While many heirs mirror their parent's ideological leanings, nearly one-third support a different political party. When these differences emerge, heirs tend to donate to more Democratic-aligned causes and candidates. I argue that involvement in the family business is a key predictor of these differences. Using a within-family research design, I show that heirs who are not involved in family business ventures are significantly more likely to diverge from their parent’s giving patterns. Finally, a within-heir event study shows that ideologically aligned heirs increase contribution activity following parent death, while divergent heirs do not, highlighting how generational wealth perpetuates elite political influence over time.

"How are Primary Nominees Decided? The Role of Large-Dollar Donors." With Danielle Thomsen.

A leading explanation for how nominees are selected is that party elites rally around their preferred candidate. Our paper provides an alternative explanation: we argue that nominees are propelled by individual large-dollar donors, with party donors and interest groups responding to signals sent by these donors. We draw on reports from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and detailed fundraising data to examine the behavior of large-dollar donors, party donors, and political action committees (PACs) across the election cycle. Our central argument is that large-dollar donors play a larger early role than either PACs or party donors and that parties and groups are more risk averse than leading accounts suggest. These groups are better understood as followers instead of leaders. We test several observable implications of our argument and find support at both the donor level and candidate level. We also provide a comprehensive analysis of when prominent donors give money across the election cycle and how much they decide to give. Our analyses of the dynamics of giving yield rich insights into the relative influence of a host of actors within both the critical pre-primary period and throughout the election cycle.