US Elections and Childcare: Examining Public Opinion on Childcare as a Campaign Expense

In the spring of 2018, the Federal Election Commission ruled that “campaign funds may be used to pay for a candidate’s childcare expenses that are incurred as a direct result of campaign activity” (FEC ruling AO 2018-6). Several US states have followed this federal ruling, allowing campaign finance to cover childcare costs in statewide elections. Opponents of childcare related campaign finance reforms have protested the reforms, stating that campaign finance should not be used for personal expenses. Proponents of the reforms state that childcare is not a personal expense, but rather an integral part of the campaign the way any other campaign resource would be. Using an experimental research design and survey data, I evaluate how the US public feels about the use of campaign contributions on childcare. I expect to find that respondents’ attitudes will vary based on partisanship and gender differences. However, I expect the treatment groups to rate campaign finance reforms more favorably when given more context about the rulings than the control group, regardless of gender and partisanship. The findings of this paper lead to a wider discussion of campaign finance reform in the United States, and leaves room for discussion about the impact of social policy on gender equality in electoral campaigns that can be studied in a comparative context.