Highlights

► Weak support for public financing of congressional campaigns reflects a collective action dilemma: political campaigns reflect a public good (information, mobilization, etc.) but few individuals are willing to pay for them. ► The desire for, or opposition to, public financing of campaigns is not necessarily driven by partisanship or narrow calculations of political self-interest (at least among the mass public) as previous studies have suggested. ► Support for subsidized campaigns plummets when individuals are asked to contribute a small amount in taxes to subsidize elections. ► In contrast to the conventional wisdom, support for subsidized elections is strongest among those who currently contribute large amounts of money and those who are solicited the most frequently (wealthy, older, educated and male). These individuals tend to bear the costs of elections, even though particularistic benefits to them are uncertain, and would rather someone else pay for elections. ► Broad support for public financing of congressional elections will be limited unless costs are not transparent to individuals. In other words, paying for elections through tax revenues is unlikely to garner much support. The findings have implications for other kinds of political reform.