Few groups are as poorly represented in Congress relative to their prevalence in the population as are members of the working-class. While working-class members of Congress vote more economically liberally than do other members, the extent to which they are more likely to introduce or write legislation to benefit the working-class is unknown. We test whether legislators from a working-class background provide better substantive representation of the working-class by introducing and writing legislation that advances working-class interests compared to non-working-class legislators. Examining Policy Content Scores and sponsorship measures across four congresses covering 3,491 social welfare bills, we find that working-class members are no more likely to write bills that include more policy tools to ensure their preferences are reflected or introduce bills that addressing working-class issues.
Adler, E. Scott, and John D. Wilkerson. 2012. “Congressional Bills Project: (2005-2012).” NSF 00880066 and 00880061. Retrieved fromhttp://www.congressionalbills.org/
2.
APSA Task Force on Inequality and American Democracy. 2004. “American Democracy in an Age of Rising Inequality.” Perspectives on Politics2 (4): 651–66.
3.
BarnesTiffany D.BeallVictoria D.HolmanMirya R.. 2021. “Pink-Collar Representation and Budgetary Outcomes in US States.” Legislative Studies Quarterly46 (1): 119–54.
4.
BartelsLarry M.2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. 1st ed.Princeton University Press.
5.
BeardCharles A.1913. An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. Simon & Schuster.
6.
BishinBenjamin G.2009. Tyranny of the Minority: The Subconstituency Politics Theory of Representation. Temple University Press.
7.
BishinBenjamin G.MuttramHarry G.. 2024. “When are Identities Politically Consequential/Identifying Conditions of Descriptive, Substantive, and Allied Group Identity.” The Forum21 (3): 339–57.
8.
BishinBenjamin G.WellerNicholas. 2025. “The Substantive Effects of Descriptive Representation: Gay and Lesbian Members of Congress are More Supportive of Gay Rights.” PS: Political Science & Politics58 (3): 393–9.
9.
BonicaAdamMcCartyNolanPooleKeith T.RosenthalHoward. 2013. “Why Hasn’t Democracy Slowed Rising Inequality?” The Journal of Economic Perspectives27 (3): 103–24.
10.
BrewerMarilynn B. 1999. “The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?” Journal of Social Issues55 (3): 429–44.
11.
BucciLaura C.JansaJoshua M.. 2021. “Who Passes Restrictive Labour Policy? A View from the States.” Journal of Public Policy41 (3): 409–39.
12.
CarnesNicholas. 2012. “Does the Numerical Underrepresentation of the Working Class in Congress Matter?” Legislative Studies Quarterly37 (1): 5–34.
13.
CarnesNicholas. 2013a. White-Collar Government: The Hidden Role of Class in Economic Policy Making. University of Chicago Press.
14.
CarnesNicholas. 2013b. “Online Appendix for Chapter 1: White-Collar Government Data Collection.” In White-Collar Government: The Hidden Role of Class in Economic Policy Making. University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/sites/carnes/index.html
15.
CarnesNicholas. 2016. Congressional Leadership and Social Status (CLASS) Dataset, Version 1.9 [Computer File]. Duke University. Released. Available online from. https://www.duke.edu/∼nwc8/class.html
16.
CarnesNicholas. 2018. The Cash Ceiling. Princeton University Press.
17.
ClausenAage R.1973. How Congressmen Decide: A Policy Focus. Cambridge University Press.
18.
DahlRobert A.2003. How Democratic is the American Constitution?Yale University Press.
19.
DoviSuzanne. 2002. “Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black, or Latino Do?” American Political Science Review96 (4): 729–43.
EnnsPeter K.KellyNathan J.MorganJanaVolschoThomasWitkoChristopher. 2014. “Conditional Status Quo Bias and Top Income Shares: How U.S. Political Institutions have Benefited the Rich.” The Journal of Politics76 (2): 289–303.
24.
EpsteinDavidO’HalloranSharyn. 1999. Delegating Powers: A Transaction Cost Politics Approach to Policy Making Under Separation of Powers. Cambridge University Press.
25.
EriksonRobert S.2015. “Income Inequality and Policy Responsiveness.” Annual Review of Political Science18: 11–29. doi: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-020614-094706.
26.
EriksonRobertGoldthorpeJohn H.PortocareroLucienne. 1979. “Intergenerational Class Mobility in Three Western European Societies: England, France and Sweden.” British Journal of Sociology30 (4): 415–41.
27.
EriksonRobertGoldthorpeJohn H.PortocareroLucienne. 1982. “Social Fluidity in Industrial Nations: England, France and Sweden.” British Journal of Sociology33 (1): 1–34.
28.
EriksonRobertGoldthorpeJohn H.PortocareroLucienne. 1983. “Intergenerational Class Mobility and the Convergence Thesis: England, France and Sweden.” British Journal of Sociology34 (3): 303–43.
29.
FieldhouseAndrew. 2013. A Review of the Economic Research on the Effects of Raising Ordinary Income Tax Rates: Higher Revenue, Unchanged Growth, and Uncertain but Potentially Large Reductions in the Growth of Inequality. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/raising-income-taxes/
30.
FrankoWilliam W.WitkoChristopher M.. 2022. “Unions, Class Identification and Policy Attitudes.” The Journal of Politics85 (2): 553–67.
31.
GayClaudine. 2002. “Spirals of Trust? the Effect of Descriptive Representation on the Relationship Between Citizens and their Government.” American Journal of Political Science46 (4): 717–32.
32.
GayClaudine. 2007. “Legislating Without Constraints: the Effect of Minority Districting on Legislators’ Responsiveness to Constituency Preferences.” The Journal of Politics69 (2): 442–56.
33.
GilensMartin. 2012. Affluence and Influence. Princeton University.
34.
GilensMartinPageBenjamin I.. 2014. “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.” Perspectives on Politics12 (3): 564–81.
35.
GoldthorpeJohn H.1987. Family Life in Western Societies. Cambridge University Press.
36.
GrumbachJacob M.2015. “Does the American Dream Matter for Members of Congress? Social-Class Backgrounds and Roll-Call Votes.” Political Research Quarterly68 (2): 306–23.
37.
HahnCaroline. 2024. “The Voice of the Absent? the Link Between Descriptive and Substantive Representation of the Working Class in Western Europe.” Political Studies72 (2): 527–50.
38.
HallRichard L.1996. Participation in Congress. Yale University Press.
39.
HansenEric R.CarnesNicholasGrayVirginia. 2019. “What Happens when Insurers Make Insurance Laws? State Legislative Agendas and the Occupational Makeup of Government.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly19 (2): 155–79.
40.
HayesThomas J.2013. “Responsiveness in an Era of Inequality: the Case of the U.S. Senate.” Political Research Quarterly66 (3): 585–99.
41.
HayesThomas J.BishinBenjamin G.. 2020. “Do Elected Officials Serve the Poor on Health Care? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Members of Congress and State Legislators.” The Social Science Journal61 (1): 30–46.
42.
HibbsDouglas A.DennisChristopher. 1988. “Income Distribution in the United States.” American Political Science Review82 (2): 467–90.
43.
HoDaniel E.ImaiKosukeKingGaryStuartElizabeth A.. 2007. “Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference.” Political Analysis15 (3): 199–236.
44.
HuberJohn D.ShipanCharles R.. 2002. Deliberate Discretion? The Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy. Cambridge University Press.
45.
JacobsLawrence R.SkocpolTheda. 2005. Inequality and American Democracy: What we Know and what we Need to Learn. Russell Sage Foundation.
KallaJoshua L.BroockmanDavid E.. 2016. “Campaign Contributions Facilitate Access to Congressional Officials: a Randomized Field Experiment.” American Journal of Political Science60 (3): 545–58.
48.
KellyNathan J.2009. The Politics of Income Inequality in the United States. Cambridge University Press.
49.
KellyNathan J.2020. America’s Inequality Trap. University of Chicago Press.
50.
KrcmaricDanielNelsonStephen C.RobertsAndrew. 2020. “Studying Leaders and Elites: the Personal Biography Approach.” Annual Review of Political Science23 (1): 133–51.
LowandeKennethRitchieMelindaLauterbachErinn. 2019. “Descriptive and Substantive Representation in Congress: Evidence from 80,000 Congressional Inquiries.” American Journal of Political Science63 (3): 644–59.
56.
MadisonJames.2001. “The Federalist No. 54: the Apportionment of Members Among the States.” In The Federalist Papers: A Commentary on the Constitution of the United States, edited by CareyGeorge W.McClellanJames, 347–53. Columbia University Press.
57.
MansbridgeJane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes’.” The Journal of Politics61 (3): 628–57.
58.
MansbridgeJane. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science Review97 (4): 515–28.
59.
ManzaJeffBrooksClem. 2008. “Class and Politics.” In Social Class: How does it Work? edited by LareauAnnetteConleyDalton. Russell Sage Foundation.
60.
McCubbinsMathew D.1985. “The Legislative Design of Regulatory Structure.” American Journal of Political Science29 (4): 721–48.
61.
MorganStephen L.2017. A Coding of Social Class for the General Social Survey. No. 125. GSS Methodological Report.
62.
NickelsonJackJansaJoshua M.. 2023. “Descriptive Representation and Innovation in American Legislatures.” Political Research Quarterly76 (4): 2018–35.
63.
OakesPenelope. 2002. “Psychological Groups and Political Psychology: a Response to Huddy’s ‘Critical Examination of Social Identity Theory’.” Political Psychology23 (4): 809–24.
64.
PantojaAdrian D.SeguraGary M.. 2003. “Does Ethnicity Matter? Descriptive Representation in Legislatures and Political Alienation Among Latinos.” Social Science Quarterly84 (2): 441–60.
PikettyThomasSaezEmmanuel. 2007. “How Progressive is the US Federal Tax System? A Historical and International Perspective.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives21 (1): 3–24.
67.
PitkinHanna Fenichel. 1967. The Concept of Representation. University of California Press.
PooleKeith T.RosenthalHoward. 2000. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. Oxford University Press.
70.
RigbyElizabethWrightGerald C.. 2013. “Political Parties and Representation of the Poor in the American States.” American Journal of Political Science57 (3): 552–65.
71.
RochaRene R.TolbertCaroline J.BowenDaniel C.ClarkChristopher J.. 2010. “Race and Turnout: Does Descriptive Representation in State Legislatures Increase Minority Voting?” Political Research Quarterly63 (4): 890–907.
72.
SchlozmanKay LehmanBradyHenry E.VerbaSidney. 2018. Unequal and Unrepresented: Political Inequality and the People’s Voice in the New Gilded Age. Princeton University Press.
73.
SossJoeJacobsLawrence R.. 2009. “The Place of Inequality: Non-Participation in the American Polity.” Political Science Quarterly124 (1): 95–125.
74.
StacyDarrian. 2025. “Wealth and Policymaking in the US House of Representatives.” Legislative Studies Quarterly50 (4): 1–15.
75.
StoutChristopher T.TateKatherineWilsonMeghan. 2021. “Does Black Representation Matter? A Review of Descriptive Representation for African Americans in Legislative Offices.” National Review of Black Politics2 (1): 2–21.
76.
TateKatherine. 2003. Black Faces in the Mirror: African Americans and their Representatives in the U.S. Congress. Princeton University Press.
VanSickle-WardRachel. 2014. The Devil is in the Details: Understanding the Causes of Policy Specificity and Ambiguity. SUNY Press.
81.
WallaceSophia J.2014. “Examining Latino Support for Descriptive Representation: the Role of Identity and Discrimination.” Social Science Quarterly95 (2): 311–27.
82.
WawroGregory. 2001. Legislative Entrepreneurship in the U.S. House of Representatives. University of Michigan Press.
83.
WeisbergHerbert F.1978. “Evaluating Theories of Congressional Roll-Call Voting.” American Journal of Political Science22 (3): 554–77.
84.
WellerNicholasBenjaminBishinLauterbachErinnThomasHayes. 2026. Replication Data for: Working-Class Legislators, Bill Writing, and Introduction: Limited Evidence of Substantive Representation in Congress. Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:Y5wHKeOt845f9kpKfUSV+A== [fileUNF]. doi:10.7910/DVN/HBCSCW.
85.
WitkoChristopherMorganJanaKellyNathan J.EnnsPeter K.. 2021. Hijacking the Agenda: Economic Power and Political Influence. Russell Sage Foundation.
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.
