Sarah A. Treul

Emotions, Oral Arguments, and Supreme Court Decision Making

Students of linguistics and psychology demonstrate that word choices people make convey information about their emotions and thereby their intentions. Focusing on theory from these related fields we test whether the emotional content of Supreme Court justices’ questions and comments made during oral arguments allow us to predict the decisions they make. Using aggregate data from all arguments between 1979 and 2008 and individual-level data from 2004 through 2008 we find justices’ use of more unpleasant language towards the attorney representing one side of a case reduces the probability that side will prevail on the merits, both in terms of individual justices’ votes and the overall case outcome.

The Symbolic and Substantive Representation of LGB Americans in the US House

As public opinion in the United States has shifted on questions of gay rights in the last decade, some members of Congress have likewise adjusted their behavior to address issues of concern to their lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) constituents. We argue that the number of LGB constituents in a district affects the representatives’ behavior. Although the size of the LGB population positively affects the substantive representation members provide to their LGB constituents, population is conditioned by majority public opinion on LGB issues in determining members’ low-cost, symbolic representation of LGB constituents. More favorable majority attitudes toward the minority allow the member to provide more symbolic representation to LGB constituents through low-cost gestures and actions. Statistical tests examining the effects of minority population and public opinion on House members’ voting records, bill sponsorships and cosponsorships, and caucus memberships from 2005 to 2011 provide support for our hypotheses.

Party Committee Targeting and the Evolution of Competition in US House Elections

Abstract This paper examines the effects of the increased role of party organizations in the recruitment and funding of congressional candidates in the US House post-1994. The recent uncertainty over which party will gain majority control of the House has transformed the role of party organizations in House campaigns. Despite the new resources devoted to each competitive seat in the House we find minimal changes in the overall competitiveness of US House elections. Additionally, the vast majority of potentially competitive seats do not draw a high quality challenger. Our results suggest that if parties recruited more quality candidates in the full range of these conceivably winnable seats this effort could produce more competitive seats or more seat turnover in the House.