The belief among citizens that their views are represented is essential to the legitimacy of American democracy, but few studies have explicitly examined which political actors Americans feel best represent them. Using data from the 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, we ask new questions about whether respondents who share a partisan, racial, or gender identification with their members of Congress (MCs) feel those members best represent them. Although the framers designed the House so that individuals’ own MCs would be their closest and most responsive representatives, a majority of respondents turn to other actors for representation. Partisanship is a key reason for this attenuated connection, as respondents who do not share a partisan identification with their MCs are more likely than those who do to rely on their party’s congressional leaders or advocacy organizations for representation instead. Sharing a racial identification with one’s own MC can strengthen representational connections as respondents who share a racial identity with their MCs are significantly more likely than respondents who do not to indicate that their MC represents them “the most.” These results shed light on enduring questions about the significance of symbolic representation and its link to partisanship and descriptive representation.
AbneyGlenHutchesonJohn. 1981. “Race, Representation, and Trust: Changes in Attitudes after the Election of a Black Mayor.” Public Opinion Quarterly45 (1): 91–101.
2.
AbramowitzAlanSaundersKyle. 2008. “Is Polarization a Myth?”The Journal of Politics70:542–55.
3.
AchenChristopher. 1978. “Measuring Representation.” American Journal of Political Science22:475–510.
4.
AinsworthScott. 2002. Analyzing Interest Groups: Group Influence on People and Policies. New York: W.W. Norton.
5.
AmerMildred. 2005. Membership of the 109th Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
6.
AnsolabehereStephenSnyderJamesStewartCharlesIII. 2001. “Candidate Positioning in U.S. House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science45 (1): 136–59.
7.
AtkesonLonna Rae. 2003. “Not All Cues Are Created Equal.” The Journal of Politics65 (4): 1040–61.
8.
AtkesonLonna RaeCarrilloNancy. 2007. “More is Better: The Influence of Collective Female Descriptive Representation on External Efficacy.” Politics & Gender3:79–101.
9.
BanducciSusanDonovanToddKarpJeffrey. 2004. “Minority Representation, Empowerment, and Participation.” The Journal of Politics66:534–56.
10.
BarretoMattSeguraGaryWoodsNathan. 2004. “The Mobilizing Effect of Majority-Minority Districts on Latino Turnout.” American Political Science Review98:65–75.
11.
BartelsLarry. 1991. “Constituency Opinion and Congressional Policy Making.” American Political Science Review85:457–74.
12.
BartelsLarry. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
13.
BeltránChristina. 2010. The Trouble with Unity: Latino Politics and the Creation of Identity. New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
BrownNadia. 2014. Sisters in the Statehouse: Black Women and Legislative Decision Making. New York: Oxford University Press.
15.
CanonDavid. 1999. Race, Redistricting, and Representation: The Unintended Consequences of Black Majority Districts. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
16.
CarrollSusan. 2002. “Representing Women.” In Women Transforming Congress, edited by RosenthalCindy Simon, 51–74. Oklahoma City: Oklahoma University Press.
ChenMingLeeTaeku. 2012. “Asian Americans, the Voting Rights Act, and the Identity-to-Politics Link.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the WPSA, Portland, OR, March 2012.
19.
CohenCathy. 1999. The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
CramerKatherine. 2016. The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
23.
CrenshawKimberlé. 1989. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex.” University of Chicago Legal Forum39:139–67.
24.
DawsonMichael. 1994. Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
25.
DodsonDebra. 2006. The Impact of Women in Congress. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
DoviSuzanne. 2002. “Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black, or Latino Do?”American Political Science Review96:729–43.
27.
DruckmanJamesJacobsLawrence. 2006. “Lumpers and Splitters: The Public Opinion Information that Politicians Collect and Use.” Public Opinion Quarterly70 (4): 453–76.
28.
DurrRobertGilmourJohnWolbrechtChristina. 1997. “Explaining Congressional Approval.” American Journal of Political Science41 (1): 175–207.
29.
EriksonRobertWrightGeraldMcIver.John1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
FennoRichard. 1978. Home Style: House Members in their Districts. Boston: Little, Brown.
31.
FennoRichard. 2003. Going Home: Black Representatives and Their Constituents. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
32.
FerejohnJohn. 1986. “Incumbent Performance and Electoral Control.” Public Choice50:5–25.
33.
FiorinaMorris. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
34.
FrymerPaul. 1999. Uneasy Alliances: Race and Party Competition in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
35.
GayClaudine. 2001. “The Effect of Black Congressional Representation on Political Participation.” American Political Science Review95:589–602.
36.
GayClaudine. 2002. “Spirals of Trust: The Effect of Descriptive Representation on the Relationship Between Citizens and Their Government.” American Journal of Political Science46:717–32.
37.
GilensMartin. 2012. Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
38.
GilensMartinPageBenjamin. 2014. “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.” Perspectives on Politics12 (3): 564–81.
39.
GriffinJohn. 2014. “When and Why Minority Legislators Matter.” Annual Review of Political Science17:327–36.
40.
HaasKaren. 2006. List of Standing Committees and Select Committee and Their Subcommittees of the House of Representatives of the United States Together with the Joint Committees of Congress with An Alphabetical List of the Members and their Committee Assignments: 109th Congress. http://historycms.house.gov/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=41195.
41.
HajnalZoltan. 2009. “Who Loses in American Democracy?”American Political Science Review103 (1): 37–57.
42.
HansenSusan. 1997. “Talking about Politics.” The Journal of Politics59 (1): 73–103.
43.
HayesMatthewHibbingMatthew. 2017. “The Symbolic Benefits of Descriptive and Substantive Representation.” Political Behavior39:31–50.
44.
HeroRodney. 1992. Latinos and the U.S. Political System: Two-Tiered Pluralism. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
45.
HibbingJohnTheiss-MorseElizabeth. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
HibbingJohnTheiss-MorseElizabeth. 2002. Stealth Democracy: Americans’ Beliefs About How Government Should Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47.
High-PippertAngelaComerJohn. 1998. “Female Empowerment: The Influence of Women Representing Women.” Women & Politics19 (4): 53–66.
48.
HowellSusanFaganDeborah. 1988. “Race and Trust in Government.” Public Opinion Quarterly52 (3): 343–50.
49.
JacobsonGary. 2007. Divider, Not a Uniter: George W. Bush and the American people: The 2006 election and beyond. Longman.
50.
JonesPhilip. 2014. “Does the Descriptive Representation of Gender Influence Accountability for Substantive Representation?”Politics & Gender10:175–99.
51.
LawlessJennifer. 2004. “Politics of Presence? Congresswomen and symbolic representation.” Political Research Quarterly57 (1): 81–99.
52.
LawlessJennifer. 2015. “Female Candidates and Legislators.” Annual Review of Political Science18:349–66.
53.
LeeFrances. 2016. Insecure Majorities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
54.
LewisAngela. 2005. “Black Conservatism in America.” Journal of African American Studies8 (4): 3–13.
55.
MansbridgeJane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes’”The Journal of Politics61 (3): 628–57.
56.
MansbridgeJane. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science Review97 (4): 515–28.
57.
MasonLilliana. 2018. Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
58.
MayhewDavid. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.
59.
MillerWarrenStokesDonald. 1963. “Constituency Influence in Congress.” American Political Science Review57:45–56.
60.
MintaMichaelBrownNadia. 2014. “Intersecting Interests: Gender, Race, and Congressional Attention to Women’s Issues.” Du Bois Review11:253–72.
61.
MintaMichaelSinclair-ChapmanValeria. 2013. “Diversity in Political Institutions and Congressional Responsiveness to Minority Interests.” Political Research Quarterly66:127–40.
62.
MontanaroLaura. 2012. “The Democratic Legitimacy of Self-Appointed Representatives.” The Journal of Politics74:1094–1107.
PantojaAdrianSeguraGary. 2003. “Does Ethnicity Matter?D escriptive Representation in Legislatures and Political Alienation Among Latinos”Social Science Quarterly84:441–60.
65.
PhilpotTasha. 2004. “A Party of a Different Color? Race, campaign communication, and party politics”Political Behavior26 (3): 249–70.
66.
PitkinHanna. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
67.
RamirezMark. 2009. “The Dynamics of Partisan Conflict on Congressional Approval.” American Journal of Political Science53 (3): 680–93.
68.
RamirezMark. 2013. “The Policy Origins of Congressional Approval.” The Journal of Politics75 (1): 198–209.
69.
RehfeldAndrew. 2005. The Concept of Constituency: Political Representation, Democratic Legitimacy, and Institutional Design. New York: Cambridge University Press.
70.
RehfeldAndrew. 2006. “Towards a General Theory of Political Representation.” The Journal of Politics68:1–21.
71.
ReingoldBethHarrellJessica. 2010. “The Impact of Descriptive Representation on Women’s Political Engagement: Does Party Matter?”Political Research Quarterly63 (2): 280–94.
72.
RosenthalCindy Simon. 1995. “The Role of Gender in Descriptive Representation.” Political Research Quarterly48:599–611.
73.
SanbonmatsuKira. 2003. “Gender-Related Knowledge and the Descriptive Representation of Women.” Political Behavior25 (4): 367–87.
74.
SapiroVirginia. 1981. “When Are Interests Interesting?”American Political Science Review75:701–16.
75.
SapiroVirginiaConoverPamela. 1997. “The Variable Gender Bias of Electoral Politics.” British Journal of Political Science27 (4): 497–523.
76.
SawardMichael. 2010. The Representative Claim. New York: Oxford University Press.
77.
SchildkrautDeborah. 2013. “Which Birds of a Feather Flock Together? Assessing Attitudes About Descriptive Representation Among Latinos and Asian Americans.” American Politics Research41 (4): 699–729.
78.
SchildkrautDeborah. 2016. “Latino Attitudes about Surrogate Representation in the United States.” Social Science Quarterly97 (3): 714–28.
79.
SchildkrautDeborah. 2017. “White Attitudes about Descriptive Representation in the US: The Roles of Identity, Discrimination, and Linked Fate.” Politics, Groups, and Identities5 (1): 84–106.
80.
StimsonJamesMacKuenMichaelEriksonRobert. 1995. “Dynamic Representation.” American Political Science Review89 (3): 543–65.
81.
StrolovitchDara. 2007. Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
82.
StrolovitchDaraWongJanelleProctorAndrew. 2017. “A Possessive Investment in White Heteropatriarchy?”Politics, Groups, and Identities5 (2): 353–63.
83.
SwersMichele. 2002. The Difference Women Make: The Policy Impact of Women in Congress. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
84.
SwersMicheleRouseStella. 2011. “Descriptive Representation: Understanding the Impact of Identify on Substantive Representation of Group Interests.” In The Oxford Handbook of the American Congress, edited by SchicklerEricLeeFrances, 241–71. New York: Oxford University Press.
85.
TateKatherine. 2003. Black Faces in the Mirror: African Americans and Their Representatives in the U.S. Congress. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
86.
TysonVanessa. 2016. Twists of Fate: Multiracial Coalitions and Minority Representation in the US House of Representatives. New York: Oxford University Press.
87.
UhlanerCarole.2002. “The Impact of Perceived Representation on Latino Political Participation.” Paper Series for the Center for the Study of Democracy, Irvine, CA.
YoungIris M.1994. “Gender as Seriality: Thinking about Women as a Social Collective.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society19:713–38.
99.
YoungIris M.1997. “Deferring Group Representation.” Nomos39:349–76.
100.
YoungIris M.2000. Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
