Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2022.2139020
Alexander Bolton, Sharece Thrower
Abstract The federal bureaucracy is well-studied, with developed research agendas on topics related to its policy decisions, performance, and interactions with the broader political system. Yet issues of diversity, equity, and inclusiveness remain relatively understudied by political scientists in this area. In this essay, we provide a blueprint for incorporating these topics into the study of the bureaucracy in political science. We first review the current state of the literature, highlighting two key issues: (1) capacity and performance and (2) political influence. In doing so, we discuss how exploring issues of diversity and equity might shed light on several unresolved questions in these areas and open potential avenues for future research. Overall, we believe that engaging with varied dimensions of diversity is fundamental for enriching the literature on the administrative state and for understanding the efficacy of our democracy in advancing the interests of marginalized groups.
{"title":"Studying Bureaucracy in a Diverse Democracy","authors":"Alexander Bolton, Sharece Thrower","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2022.2139020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2022.2139020","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The federal bureaucracy is well-studied, with developed research agendas on topics related to its policy decisions, performance, and interactions with the broader political system. Yet issues of diversity, equity, and inclusiveness remain relatively understudied by political scientists in this area. In this essay, we provide a blueprint for incorporating these topics into the study of the bureaucracy in political science. We first review the current state of the literature, highlighting two key issues: (1) capacity and performance and (2) political influence. In doing so, we discuss how exploring issues of diversity and equity might shed light on several unresolved questions in these areas and open potential avenues for future research. Overall, we believe that engaging with varied dimensions of diversity is fundamental for enriching the literature on the administrative state and for understanding the efficacy of our democracy in advancing the interests of marginalized groups.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46478186","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2023.2208474
Emily Baer
{"title":"Hunt, Charles. Home Field Advantage: Roots, Reelection, and Representation in the Modern Congress. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2022. 270 pages. $85 (hardcover).","authors":"Emily Baer","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2208474","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2208474","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49621734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2023.2208473
Valeria Sinclair-Chapman, D. Barker
Abstract That section membership in Legislative Studies and Presidential & Executive Politics has been persistently lacking in racial, ethnic, and gender diversity is no secret. Recent work by Powell, Schwindt-Bayer, and Sin, among others, has sought to bring attention to and increase the number of women scholars in the legislative studies section (LSS). In these introductory comments to the Special Issue, we draw a link between the demographic diversity of scholars and the research questions, topics, and approaches that the subfields consequently produce or overlook. This focus on what we are calling, “New Perspectives in Studies of American Governance,” is one outcome of a collaboration between American University, Purdue University, and The William and Flora Hewlett to invite broader participation in panels, conferences, memberships, and meetings within historically homogenous subfield specific associational groups. In addition to presenting the results of a novel survey of more than 200 faculty respondents from political science departments across the country to better understand perspectives on diversity and inclusion in LSS, we also highlight the set of outstanding papers published in this issue that exemplify the broadened landscape we seek to encourage.
{"title":"Broadening Perspectives in Studies of American Governance","authors":"Valeria Sinclair-Chapman, D. Barker","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2208473","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2208473","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract That section membership in Legislative Studies and Presidential & Executive Politics has been persistently lacking in racial, ethnic, and gender diversity is no secret. Recent work by Powell, Schwindt-Bayer, and Sin, among others, has sought to bring attention to and increase the number of women scholars in the legislative studies section (LSS). In these introductory comments to the Special Issue, we draw a link between the demographic diversity of scholars and the research questions, topics, and approaches that the subfields consequently produce or overlook. This focus on what we are calling, “New Perspectives in Studies of American Governance,” is one outcome of a collaboration between American University, Purdue University, and The William and Flora Hewlett to invite broader participation in panels, conferences, memberships, and meetings within historically homogenous subfield specific associational groups. In addition to presenting the results of a novel survey of more than 200 faculty respondents from political science departments across the country to better understand perspectives on diversity and inclusion in LSS, we also highlight the set of outstanding papers published in this issue that exemplify the broadened landscape we seek to encourage.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41404364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2023.2208476
Virginia H. Gray
{"title":"McKay, Amy Melissa. Stealth Lobbying: Interest Group Influence and Health Care Reform","authors":"Virginia H. Gray","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2208476","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2208476","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45859221","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2022.2142323
Stella M. Rouse
Abstract In this article, I look at how differences in committee participation help further explain the way Latinos are represented in Congress. I examine levels of participation in four committees in the House of Representatives for the 109th–112th Congresses. I find that Latino committee members participate at greater levels when high Latino saliency legislation is considered, but overall they do not engage in greater committee activity compared to non-Latino members. I also find that a higher percentage of Latinos in a district leads to greater levels of activity among committee members, especially when considering high Latino saliency bills. The results show that Latinos receive substantive representation in committees via district composition, but that descriptive representation is relative and not absolute. These findings may speak to the continued lack of Latino institutional power and the tradeoffs Latino members must consider when deciding where and when to invest legislative effort. Furthermore, the results underscore the importance of institutional context in assessing the link between descriptive and substantive representation.
{"title":"Opportunities for Legislative Influence? Latinos and Committee Participation in the U.S. Congress","authors":"Stella M. Rouse","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2022.2142323","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2022.2142323","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, I look at how differences in committee participation help further explain the way Latinos are represented in Congress. I examine levels of participation in four committees in the House of Representatives for the 109th–112th Congresses. I find that Latino committee members participate at greater levels when high Latino saliency legislation is considered, but overall they do not engage in greater committee activity compared to non-Latino members. I also find that a higher percentage of Latinos in a district leads to greater levels of activity among committee members, especially when considering high Latino saliency bills. The results show that Latinos receive substantive representation in committees via district composition, but that descriptive representation is relative and not absolute. These findings may speak to the continued lack of Latino institutional power and the tradeoffs Latino members must consider when deciding where and when to invest legislative effort. Furthermore, the results underscore the importance of institutional context in assessing the link between descriptive and substantive representation.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47220949","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2023.2208475
G. Dodds
{"title":"Morgan, Iwan. FDR: Transforming the Presidency and Renewing America","authors":"G. Dodds","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2208475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2208475","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42392088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2023.2208477
S. Savage
{"title":"Knott, Stephen F. Coming to Terms with John F. Kennedy","authors":"S. Savage","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2208477","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2208477","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47557714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2022.2158963
P. C. Peay, Alexander Leasure
Abstract Information is one of the most prized commodities in the legislative decision-making process. However, gaining access to high quality information through traditional institutional means in decreasing, and institutional and interpersonal marginalization puts Black lawmakers at a distinct disadvantage. This article explains how Black lawmakers rely on extra-party institutions to fulfill the desire for information when the institution falls short. In fulfilling this responsibility as the key source of information on conditions that plague the Black community, the organization has developed an information infrastructure—a combination of internal and external mechanisms designed to improve their research and informational capacity. To highlight the utility of the information infrastructure, we examine Special Order Hour Speeches delivered from the 113th through the 115th Congress (2013–2018). We find, the CBC information infrastructure provides its members access to highly specialized information without having to sacrifice the quality of sources to account for information search costs.
{"title":"Information Infrastructures for Black-Interest Advocacy in Congress","authors":"P. C. Peay, Alexander Leasure","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2022.2158963","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2022.2158963","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Information is one of the most prized commodities in the legislative decision-making process. However, gaining access to high quality information through traditional institutional means in decreasing, and institutional and interpersonal marginalization puts Black lawmakers at a distinct disadvantage. This article explains how Black lawmakers rely on extra-party institutions to fulfill the desire for information when the institution falls short. In fulfilling this responsibility as the key source of information on conditions that plague the Black community, the organization has developed an information infrastructure—a combination of internal and external mechanisms designed to improve their research and informational capacity. To highlight the utility of the information infrastructure, we examine Special Order Hour Speeches delivered from the 113th through the 115th Congress (2013–2018). We find, the CBC information infrastructure provides its members access to highly specialized information without having to sacrifice the quality of sources to account for information search costs.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47769405","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-28DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2023.2174613
Danielle Vinson, Jacob M. Lollis
Abstract How do co-partisans respond to the President on Twitter? This article examines whether and how Republican legislators reacted to President Trump in five instances when he broke with Republican Party policy positions or norms. We theorize that legislators’ electoral environment, constituency, and identity shape their response to the president, and we test our hypotheses using nearly 2,500 hand-coded tweets from Republican legislators between 2018-2020. The overwhelming reaction by Republican legislators to Trump’s actions was to ignore him. When members did react to the president, their response was primarily driven by their electoral environment and identity. Those from the most Trump supportive districts supported the president, and retiring members were most likely to oppose him. Male legislators were much more likely to support and oppose the president, while female legislators mostly ignored him. And, if they reacted, the most ideologically extreme Republicans were more likely to support than oppose the president. The implications of these findings are troubling. Even when President Trump violated traditional norms or deviated from long held party positions, his congressional co-partisans remained silent, occasionally offering support but rarely opposition.
{"title":"Nothing to See Here: Republican Congressional Members’ Twitter Reactions to Donald Trump","authors":"Danielle Vinson, Jacob M. Lollis","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2174613","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2174613","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How do co-partisans respond to the President on Twitter? This article examines whether and how Republican legislators reacted to President Trump in five instances when he broke with Republican Party policy positions or norms. We theorize that legislators’ electoral environment, constituency, and identity shape their response to the president, and we test our hypotheses using nearly 2,500 hand-coded tweets from Republican legislators between 2018-2020. The overwhelming reaction by Republican legislators to Trump’s actions was to ignore him. When members did react to the president, their response was primarily driven by their electoral environment and identity. Those from the most Trump supportive districts supported the president, and retiring members were most likely to oppose him. Male legislators were much more likely to support and oppose the president, while female legislators mostly ignored him. And, if they reacted, the most ideologically extreme Republicans were more likely to support than oppose the president. The implications of these findings are troubling. Even when President Trump violated traditional norms or deviated from long held party positions, his congressional co-partisans remained silent, occasionally offering support but rarely opposition.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81792263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-28DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2023.2167136
Lukas K. Alexander, N. Jacobs
Abstract In this article, we detail how the rise of executive-centered partisanship has transformed president-Senate relations since 1993. We argue that the growing centrality of the president as a figurehead for their party has produced incentives for both co-partisans and out-partisans. We use a measure of presidential “success” to model variation over time and between individual senators. We show that rising presidential partisanship has increased the likelihood for out-partisans to oppose the president’s legislative position, even after controlling for other markers of partisan polarization. This relationship is strongest among electorally vulnerable out-partisans. In addition, our data suggest that Republican out-partisans asymmetrically oppose Democratic presidents. We conclude that the growing centrality of the presidency in party affairs has had effects beyond administrative preemption of the legislative process; it has increasingly set a hard limit on bi-partisan cooperation on legislation and nominee confirmations in the Senate.
{"title":"Presidential Partisanship and Legislative Cooperation in the U.S. Senate, 1993–2021","authors":"Lukas K. Alexander, N. Jacobs","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2023.2167136","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2023.2167136","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, we detail how the rise of executive-centered partisanship has transformed president-Senate relations since 1993. We argue that the growing centrality of the president as a figurehead for their party has produced incentives for both co-partisans and out-partisans. We use a measure of presidential “success” to model variation over time and between individual senators. We show that rising presidential partisanship has increased the likelihood for out-partisans to oppose the president’s legislative position, even after controlling for other markers of partisan polarization. This relationship is strongest among electorally vulnerable out-partisans. In addition, our data suggest that Republican out-partisans asymmetrically oppose Democratic presidents. We conclude that the growing centrality of the presidency in party affairs has had effects beyond administrative preemption of the legislative process; it has increasingly set a hard limit on bi-partisan cooperation on legislation and nominee confirmations in the Senate.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76393306","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：