Intersectionality and Politics

Recent Research on Gender, Race, and Political Representation in the United States

Carol Hardy-Fanta

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781135805470
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politica e relazioni internazionali
• Subtopic: Politica

Cutting-edge research on the intersection of race, gender, and politics
Traditionally, there has been a significant lack of empirical attention given to the ways in which race/ethnicity, gender, and political representation overlap. Intersectionality and Politics is the groundbreaking collection of contemporary research and essays that applies the concept of intersectionality specifically to descriptive and substantive representation by African-American, Latino/a, and Asian-American elected officials. This unique compilation looks at numerous states and focuses on multiple racial/ethnic groups to demonstrate the importance of this theory for understanding the political leadership of people of color and women. Intersectionality and Politics is the wide-ranging text that is both informative overview and thought-provoking analysis of a subject that has received little practical study. Articles in this important text cover a expansive gamut—from women of color as elected officials and the changing face of leadership in America today to an exploration of the growing interest in intersectionality and a look toward the potential of future research—making it a useful and comprehensive one-stop resource.
Contributors to Intersectionality and Politics explore critical topics such as:

• the contours and context of descriptive representation with a focus on women of color
• the puzzle of women of color's proportionately higher percentage of office holding in state legislatures
• agenda-setting behavior of African-American female state legislators
• the impact of race and gender on the likelihood of legislative bill submission and passage
• patterns of gendered representation and related legislative advocacy within Latino delegations in the Southwest
• new findings on the Latino/a gender gap
• the public policy implications of intersectionality theory
• and many more!

Complete with extensive bibliographies and a wealth of tables and figures to highlight the striking findings, Intersectionality and Politics is ideal for undergraduate and graduate students and educators in political science, ethnic studies, Latino/Black/Asian studies, gender studies, sociology, and women's studies. Policymakers, politicians, and those working in high-minority areas will also find this to be an invaluable text.

SUBSTANTIVE IMPACT OF THE CHANGING FACE OF ELECTED OFFICIALS

Agenda Setting and African American Women in State Legislatures

Kathleen A. Bratton, Louisiana State University
Kerry L. Haynie, Duke University
Beth Reingold, Emory University

SUMMARY. Political scientists have, in recent years, uncovered substantial evidence that political representation in the United States is influenced by gender and race, yet generally examine the effects of gender entirely separate from the effects of race. In this article, we explore the agenda-setting behavior of African American female state legislators. We find that African American women do respond to both women’s interests and black interests. We also find that while the sponsorship of black interest measures by African American women (or other legislators) is not influenced by the proportion of African Americans within the chamber, African American women are less likely to sponsor women’s interest measures in legislatures with a relatively high proportion of women present. We conclude that because of their focus on multiple groups, black women occupy a unique place in representation, and that their choices are influenced by the institutional context in which they work. doi:10.1300/J501v28n03_04 [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <[email protected]> Website: <h­t­t­p­://w­w­w­.H­a­w­o­r­t­h­P­r­e­s­s­.c­o­m> © 2006 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

KEYWORDS. Intersectionality, race, gender, political representation, African American women, legislative behavior

INTRODUCTION

Political scientists have, in recent years, uncovered substantial evidence that gender and race influence political representation in the United States.¹ Scholars have shown that women elected to public office are generally more likely than men to focus on interests particularly relevant to women; likewise, African American legislators are generally more likely to focus on interests particularly relevant to African Americans (Bratton and Haynie 1999; Canon 1999; Haynie 2001; Reingold 2000; Swers 2002; Thomas 1994; Wolbrecht 2000). Yet, to date, little research has examined whether and how the intersection of race and gender influences legislative behavior. When studying race, gender, and representation, political scientists have often assumed that there are no gender differences among black representatives, and no racial differences among female representatives. Indeed, attention has often been paid only to what factors influence the representation of women or to what factors influence the representation of African Americans.

Such approaches are hardly surprising given how recently U.S. legislatures have become more diverse; it has only been in the past three decades that women and African Americans have been elected to state office in substantial numbers. State legislatures have been a natural focus for the study of race, gender, and representation, given that they have a relatively high degree of diversity, and that there is substantial variance across states in institutional context. However, it has only been since the early 1990s that multi-state studies of the role of gender and race in political representation have become relatively common, and, with few exceptions, the study of gender and representation has proceeded on a separate track from the study of race and representation. Such single-axis approaches (Crenshaw 1998) to the study of representation are clearly overly simplistic; as Hawkesworth (2003) notes, representation is not only raced, and not only gendered, but “raced-gendered.”

In this article, we address the intersection of race and gender by focusing on the behavior of African American women serving in state legislatures. We explore two questions. First, we examine whether African American women demonstrate policy interests that are distinct. African American women may be more active or more likely than other legislators to focus their efforts on policies that relate to the intersection of gender and race. Second, we explore whether institutional factors, such as the percentage of women and African American legislators within a chamber, influence the legislative behavior of African American women.

RACE, GENDER, AND POLICY INTERESTS

While most studies of diversity and representation do adopt the single-axis approach described above, there are exceptions. Some of the research on race, gender, and representation examines whether racial identification or consciousness enhances or conflicts with gender identification or consciousness. Prestage (1977) notes that African American women face a double disadvantage that has important implications for their legislative behavior and success. In addition to recognizing African American women’s “double minority status” (1977, 415), Prestage’s study reveals a significant amount of ambivalence toward the women’s liberation movement among these women. This leads to the question whether the multiple identifications of African American women conflict with each other or enhance each other. As Darcy and Hadley (1988) note, one possibility is that African American women prioritize one identification over the other. Some authors argue that racism is or should be the primary concern of black women; others argue that sexism is an equal or greater obstacle to equality. Alternatively, it is possible that racial identification or consciousness may enhance gender identification or consciousness–and vice versa. Indeed, Simien (2005) has found some evidence that this is the case in the mass public.

What little research exists on state legislative behavior suggests that African American women do respond to both women’s interests and black interests, and in that manner occupy a unique place in representation. In a survey designed to examine the experiences and policy priorities of African American state legislators, Barrett (1995) finds that African American women are similar in their policy interests to both African American legislators and female legislators, all of whom tend to name education and health care reform, unemployment, and economic development as top issues. African American women are relatively united in their policy interests, and name more policy priorities than either black men or white women. In further studies, Barrett (1997) finds that African American women are different from their colleagues in that they are more likely to perceive both groups of legislators–blacks and women–as having something important and unique to contribute to representation. African American men, on the other hand, are more likely to perceive racial gaps as more important than gender gaps, and white women are more likely to perceive gender gaps as more important than racial gaps.

In this article, we build on this literature by examining whether African American female legislators bring to the agenda a set of issues that is distinct from that of African American men or non-black women. Agenda setting is a crucial point in any policy-making endeavor (Bachrach and Baratz 1963; Cobb and Elder 1983; Kingdon 1989), and can affect policy preferences and outcomes by defining the set of alternatives. Moreover, the agenda-setting stage of the process represents a point at which representatives likely have an opportunity to address group interests in a way that is compatible with other influences on their behavior, such as district composition and partisanship. We choose in this article to focus on agenda-setting in the form of bill sponsorship because it is the stage of the legislative process at which gender and racial differences are most likely to emerge.² Scholars have noted that bill sponsorship serves as an excellent measure of commitment to an issue (e.g., Canon 1999; Haynie 2001; Reingold 2000; Swers 2002).

In one of the few studies that examine the sponsorship behavior of African American women, Bratton and Haynie (1999) find that African American women are somewhat less likely than African American men to focus on black interests, and somewhat less likely than white women to focus on women’s interests. One possible explanation for this, given the unique place African American women occupy in politics, is that African American women are more likely than other legislators to focus on legislation addressing the interests of African Americans or women, even if they introduce somewhat fewer measures in any particular category. We explore that possibility in this paper. We also explore whether African American women introduce more measures in policy areas that may not explicitly involve race or gender, but that hold particular relevance for both groups, such as measures addressing poverty.

RACE, GENDER, AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT

We also examine the possibility that African American women are particularly influenced in their agenda-setting choices by contextual factors such as the presence of other women and other African Americans within the chamber. In the extant research on gender and representation, several scholars have examined the effect that institutional context has in shaping representation. One of the most often named contextual factors that may influence legislative behavior of women is the gender diversity of the chamber. In a study of an anonymous corporation, Kanter (1977) argues that in contexts in which there were few women, gender differences are highlighted and exaggerated by the majority (men), and women are treated as representatives of their category (“tokens”) rather than as individuals. Kanter argues that in response, it is likely that women in these contexts attempt to downplay gender differences and blend into the background. Political scientists drew upon this research to argue that gender differences would be more pronounced in relatively diverse legislatures, or as the number of female legislators approaches a “critical mass” (e.g., Saint-Germain 1989; Thomas 1994).

Yet as Cammisa and Reingold (2004) note, critical mass theory presents a challenge for researchers for several reasons. First, the theory can be used to predict two conflicting outcomes; women serving as tokens may downplay gender differences or–as Kanter (1993) later acknowledges–some women might respond to token status by capitalizing on their greater visibility. As Bratton (2005) notes, this response might be particularly likely among female politicians. We know that female legislators quite often see themselves as representing women (Reingold 1992) and are more likely to report being proud of accomplishments relating to bills dealing with women (Thomas 1994); they are, in this respect, much different than the corporate employees described in Kanter’s work. Having so few other women present, female legislators may have added incentive to act on behalf of women’s interests, either because they believe no one else will, or because they see a good opportunity to make their mark (Swers 2002). Indeed, given that female legislators may be seen as voters as better able to handle traditional women’s interests (Dolan 2004), women may have an electoral incentive to focus on those interests regardless of the presence of other women. Moreover, as the number of women grows, women may begin to influence men, and gender differences may actually narrow (Bratton 2005; Bratton and Ray 2002). Bratton (2005) finds that women who serve in very male-dominated legislatures are just as likely as–in some cases, more likely than–those who serve in more gender diverse legislature to be relatively active in placing gender issues on the policy agenda.

The critical mass literature has tended to focus on sex differences in representation, but the theory can be applied to racial differences as well. Yet very little research examines whether–and how–African American legislators respond to changes in racial diversity within a chamber. Bratton (2002) finds that as the number of African Americans in a legislative chamber increases, individual legislators introduce fewer black interest measures, although the total number of black interest measur...