Abstract

In contrast to the extensive literature on the determinants of campaign spending and its effect on candidates' electoral performance, comparatively less literature exists on the legal and sanctioning characteristics of political finance systems. Though some contributions have analyzed and compared the institutional designs of these financing systems, limited literature has empirically examined infractions and sanctions of electoral laws, categorized as either a crime or a misdemeanor, by the candidates. Limited knowledge exists about the political and sociodemographic profile of candidates who commit such offenses or misdemeanors, a gap this study addresses by empirically analyzing electoral law infractions. Using the case of Chile and an unpublished database of infractions of 38,246 candidates in the local elections of 2008, 2012, and 2016, as well as the legislative elections of 2009, 2013, and 2017, we present four conclusions. First, only about one-fifth of candidates commit such infractions. Second, such infractions are more common during first-tier elections, especially in deputy and senatorial elections. Third, the candidates most likely to commit such infractions are independent candidates who compete in regions remote from large urban centers, especially in rural areas. Fourth, the rise in infractions is linked to a new law that more strictly regulates candidates' campaign spending. The study enhances our understanding of the efficacy of political finance systems and the enforcement of electoral sanctions. In general, electoral infractions are studied from the point of view of the conduct of voters or of the bodies in charge of regulating elections. Not much has been written about electoral law infractions committed by candidates. In this article, we describe and analyze those infractions committed by candidates taking as a case study the elections in Chile between 2008 and 2017 (38,246 candidates), corresponding to three municipal elections and three legislative elections. We find that about 20% of all candidates commit electoral infractions, that these infractions are more frequent in legislative elections, and that the candidates most likely to commit infractions are independents. We suggest that the rise in infractions in 2016 and 2017 responded to a series of reforms to the campaign spending law in 2016 that established new fines for minor infractions and prison sentences for serious infractions. Accordingly, this article provides a novel statistical analysis of electoral infractions in the context of a much stricter and more rigorous campaign spending law.