Replication data for: Upstream Influence: The Positive Impact of PAC Contributions on Marcellus Shale Role Call Votes in Pennsylvania

Political scientists have long tried to explain how interest group lobbying and political action committee campaign donations affect election outcomes and public policy debates. Unfortunately, they are often met with null or conflicting results. Consequently, scholars have tested the influence of campaign donations on Congressional outcomes in different parts of the policy-making process, such as roll call votes and committee hearings. Building on these findings, I use the adoption of a Marcellus Shale impact fee in Pennsylvania to test whether campaign contributions have a different effect on bill amendment roll call votes than final floor votes. Given the differing political contexts of these two votes, it stands to reason that there is variation in the relationship between campaign donations and member voting behavior. Specifically, I expect that legislators have more flexibility in voting on amendments than on final bills, and thus factors other than party, including campaign funding, are also relevant. I find that while party, ideology and tenure are the only significant factors associated with roll call votes on final bills, campaign contributions and local-level salience are positively associated with voting on amendments. This shows that while moneyed interests may not be successful in stopping undesirable legislation, they can achieve legislative victory by shaping the bill as it travels through the legislature.政治学者长期以来致力于阐释利益集团游说（interest group lobbying）与政治行动委员会（Political Action Committee, PAC）的竞选捐款如何影响选举结果与公共政策辩论。遗憾的是，相关研究往往得到零显著性结果或彼此矛盾的结论。有鉴于此，学者们已在政策制定的不同环节检验了竞选捐款对国会表决结果的影响，例如唱名表决（roll call votes）与委员会听证会（committee hearings）。基于上述研究发现，本文以宾夕法尼亚州（Pennsylvania）马塞勒斯页岩影响费（Marcellus Shale Impact Fee）的出台过程为研究场景，检验竞选捐款对法案修正案唱名表决（bill amendment roll call votes）与全院最终表决（final floor votes）的影响是否存在差异。鉴于这两类表决所处的政治语境存在差异，竞选捐款与议员（legislators）投票行为之间的关联存在异质性便合乎情理。具体而言，本文推测议员在修正案表决中拥有比最终法案表决更多的投票灵活性，因此除党派因素外，竞选资金等其他因素也会对投票行为产生影响。本文研究发现，党派认同、意识形态（ideology）与任职年限（tenure）是仅有的与最终法案唱名表决显著相关的因素；而竞选捐款与地方议题关注度（local-level salience）则与修正案表决的投票行为呈显著正相关。这一结果表明，尽管金钱利益集团或许无法成功阻挠不受欢迎的法案，但它们可以通过在法案历经立法机构审议的过程中对其进行重塑，从而获得立法层面的胜利。