Kathryn Pearson

The Primary Reason for Women's Underrepresentation? Reevaluating the Conventional Wisdom

When women run in general elections for the U.S. House of Representatives, they win at approximately the same rates as their male counterparts. With the exception of studies of selected congressional districts in particular years, however, scholars have virtually ignored the gender dynamics of the congressional primary process. In this paper, we fill this void, analyzing data from 1958 to 2004 to test hypotheses about womens victory rates and levels of primary competition. Our analysis results in an additional explanation for womens underrepresentation: the congressional primary process. Although women generally do not win primaries at lower rates than their male counterparts, women in both parties face more primary competition than do men. Gender neutral victory rates, then, are not the result of a gender neutral primary process. Women have to be “better” than their male counterparts in order to fare equally well.

Testing Huntington: Is Hispanic Immigration a Threat to American Identity?

Samuel Huntington argues that the sheer number, concentration, linguistic homogeneity, and other characteristic of Hispanic immigrants will erode the dominance of English as a nationally unifying language, weaken the countrys dominant cultural values, and promote ethnic allegiances over a primary identification as an American. Testing these hypotheses with data from the U.S. Census and national and Los Angeles opinion surveys, we show that Hispanics acquire English and lose Spanish rapidly beginning with the second generation, and appear to be no more or less religious or committed to the work ethic than native-born whites. Moreover, a clear majority of Hispanics reject a purely ethnic identification and patriotism grows from one generation to the next. At present, a traditional pattern of political assimilation appears to prevail. Jack Citrin is Professor of Political Science at University of California, Berkeley (gojack@berkeley.edu). Amy Lerman is a doctoral candidate in Political Science at University of California, Berkeley (alerman@berkeley.edu). Michael Murakami is a doctoral candidate in Political Science at University of California, Berkeley (mmurakam@berkeley.edu) and Kathryn Pearson is Assistant Professor Political Science at University of Minnesota (kpearson@umn.edu).

Agenda Control, Majority Party Power, and the House Committee on Rules, 1937–52

The role of the U.S. House Rules Committee is consequential for theories of congressional parties, yet its role during the “conservative coalition” era is not well understood. We systematically analyzed the politics surrounding all special rules considered in Democratic Congresses from 1937 to 1952. We found that Rules repeatedly used its agenda power to push to the floor conservative initiatives that were opposed by the Democratic administration, the Rules Committee chair, and most northern Democrats, especially in Congresses that followed Republican election gains. The 44 conservative initiatives we identified include many of the most important policy issues considered during the period. Our findings challenge the idea that the majority party has consistently enjoyed a veto over which initiatives reach the floor, and they underscore the limits of roll-call-vote analysis in assessments of agenda control.

Elevating Women’s Voices in Congress: Speech Participation in the House of Representatives

The authors analyze gender differences in members’ speech participation on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. Speeches increase members’ visibility and voice in the legislative process, providing opportunities for members to highlight their policy knowledge, constituents’ concerns, and partisan commitments. The authors hypothesize that women’s underrepresentation, coupled with the related challenges that female legislators face in a predominantly male institution, motivates congresswomen of both parties to speak at greater rates than congressmen. Analyzing over ten thousand floor speeches during the 103rd and 109th Congresses, the authors find strong support for their hypothesis, demonstrating that congresswomen’s participation in legislative debate increases their visibility and enhances women’s substantive representation.

Congressional Parties and Civil Rights Politics from 1933 to 1972

The reversal in the Democratic and Republican parties’ positions on civil rights is widely viewed as one of the most important political transformations in the last century. Drawing upon new indicators of members’ support for civil rights - which more effectively gauge preferences than do the roll-call based measures analyzed in previous studies - we show that northern Democrats displaced northern Republicans as the leading advocates of civil rights in the House beginning in the mid-1940s, and that the gap gradually increased thereafter. Rather than a relatively sudden change driven by national party elites, we argue that the civil rights realignment was a response to the two parties’ coalitional partners.

What it takes to win: Questioning gender neutral outcomes in U.S. house elections

When women run for office, they win at the same rate as men. A significant body of research substantiating this claim has been touted by scholars and womens groups alike. “Gender neutral” outcomes, however, mask important sex differences in congressional candidacies. Indeed, extensive research has revealed a gender gap in political ambition: women are more hesitant to run for office and are more concerned about their credentials and viability than similarly situated men.

Discharge Petitions, Agenda Control, and the Congressional Committee System, 1929–76

The discharge petition process offers a simple majority of members of the U.S. House of Representatives a mechanism to circumvent gatekeeping imposed by committees and party leaders. Using recently discovered data on all discharge petitions filed from 1929 to 1976, along with public data from 1993 to 2006, we test hypotheses about partisan agenda control and the House committee system. Rather than universalistic norms of deference to committees, we find that members with a greater stake in the committee system were less likely to sign than were other members. In addition, northern Democrats, despite their majority party status, were more likely than Republicans to sign discharge petitions for much of the 1940–60s, in sharp contrast to majority party members’ unwillingness to sign in the contemporary era.

Demographic Change and the Future of Congress

The United States population is changing in significant ways: it is growing larger, older, and more racially and ethnically diverse, and these changes are regionally concentrated. How will these changes affect the future of Congress? In this article, I show that demographic change has significant implications for the quality of representation, the legislative agenda, party coalitions, and the diversity of congressional membership in the future, even as change inside Congress will proceed more slowly than change outside it.

Crossing the Aisle: Party Switching by U.S. Legislators in the Postwar Era.

does not otherwise consider the ways in which party-linked lobbies may aid or hinder leaders’ efforts. The major contribution of Pearson’s book is her exploration of congressional leaders’ strategic use of benefits to encourage various forms of loyalty among the rank-and-file members. To her credit, she also notes when results diverge from her expectations. Loyalty, even broadly construed, seems to be, at most, one of several factors affecting the allocation of benefits. It is probably impossible to accomplish a precise estimate of discipline’s effect, however. We do not know which representatives were holdouts on the bills that Speakers kept from the floor for lack of sufficient votes. Similarly obscured are representatives who promise Speakers their vote if it is needed, but are later released from these commitments. These measurement problems probably bias estimates of loyalty’s impact downward. This book covers only the early phase of former Speaker John Boehner’s fateful struggle with the far right. Pearson notes that typically disloyal representatives come from districts in which their party is weak. Boehner’s troubles with the Tea Party were unusual in this respect. However, after a brief honeymoon, Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) has faced increasing resistance from the Freedom Caucus. Future studies should explore the question of how disciplinary strategies may vary in technique and utility vis-à-vis moderates and extremists. When scholars next address this topic, they will do well to build upon Pearson’s valuable and timely study.

The Macropolitics of Congress

The Macropolitics of Congress. Edited by E. Scott Adler and John S. Lapinski. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006. 288p.