Abstract
The article focuses on spending on election campaigns. Specifically proposed: a) producing a mapping of election expenses of the 2010 election made by candidates to the House; b) Identify existing patterns of spending; c) Identify the existence of significant statistical correlation between different patterns of electoral spending and election results at the polls. The questions guiding the work are: a) how actors use their resources express the particularities of the contestants? b) certain campaign spending have greater impact on the electoral success than others? For purposes of mapping of election expenses has produced a classification that seek to apprehend election spending into three broad categories: 1) Spending on Advertising; 2) Spending on Infrastructure campaign; and 3) Personnel Expenses. The most important findings are the perception that only the amount of money is not enough to explain the electoral success. The models show that the spending pattern needs to be focused and that higher expenses are intended for communication and advertising. In addition, candidates who compete in elections better organized parties and with a degree of more centralized coordination are better than their competitors, as hypothesis originally presented by Guarnieri (2011).
financing of campaigns; election expenses; federal deputy; elections; providing of electoral expenses
