Community Structure in Congressional Cosponsorship Networks

We study the United States Congress by constructing networks between Members of Congress based on the legislation that they cosponsor. Using the concept of modularity, we identify the community structure of Congressmen, as connected via sponsorship/cosponsorship of the same legislation, to investigate the collaborative communities of legislators in both chambers of Congress. This analysis yields an explicit and conceptually clear measure of political polarization, demonstrating a sharp increase in partisan polarization which preceded and then culminated in the 104th Congress (1995-1996), when Republicans took control of both chambers. Although polarization has since waned in the U.S. Senate, it remains at historically high levels in the House of Representatives.Comment: 8 pages, 4 figures (some with multiple parts), to appear in Physica A; additional background info and explanations added from last versio

Cosponsorship Networks in the U.S. Congress: Measuring the Success of Female Legislators

Previous scholarship has demonstrated that minority group members in the United States Congress generally are more supportive and collaborative within and beyond their respective groups compared to their majority group counterparts (Craig et al., 2015; Rouse, Swers and Parrott, 2013). In some cases, increased levels of collaboration positively influence legislative success and in others they do not, the results often depending on the characteristic of the group itself and the institutional setting within which the group operates. Additionally, prior studies within the domains of social network analysis and legislative behavior have shown that certain social network measures within a legislative context are associated with higher levels of legislative activity and success. Combining these elements, along with traditional variables found in many studies of legislative behavior, in a longitudinal analysis of gendered effects within both chambers of Congress has to my knowledge never been explored. This research examines chamber- and gender-specific sponsorship and cosponsorship data using the methods of social network analysis and logistic regression models during the 102nd through 114th Congresses. The methods used in this analysis test the hypotheses that female legislators in both chambers 1) exhibit greater sponsorship and co-sponsorship activity rates than their male counterparts, 2) form better social networks metrics than their male counterparts, and 3) despite these characteristics, are less successful than men in passing their sponsored binding, force-of-law measures through each chamber compared to male members in each chamber. I expect that women in Congress are not as successful, despite demonstrating success-based characteristics, because of prejudicial attitudes perpetuated by each chamber’s dominant gender group, males. The results of my analyses confirm that female representatives and senators are more active cosponsors than men and form better networks in the House of Representatives than men as measured by some but not all network measures used in the analyses. However, when comparing the legislative success of women to their male counterparts, the results were different for each chamber; females in the House were less successful than males in achieving success for their sponsored legislation, but in the Senate there were no statistically significant findings to support the same conclusion. I suggest that the differences in membership size, length of terms of service, and other institutional characteristics between the two chambers are factors contributing to the different results

The Relational Determinants of Legislative Success: Strong and Weak Ties Between Legislators

In the repeated interactions of a legislative session, legislators develop working relationships that can be used in the pursuit of legislative goals. I develop a theory of influence diffusion across a legislative network of relations based on strategic actors building relationships in order to increase legislative success. Building on sociological theory initially developed by Granovetter, my research indicates that it is the weak ties between legislators that are the most useful in increasing legislative success. I test my theory using state legislative data from eight state legislatures, along with a second analysis of the US House of Representatives. Empirical analysis provides consistent support for the notion that weak ties lead to legislative success

The Effect of Party Polarization on Bipartisan Cosponsorship in the United States Senate

The literature on political polarization and bipartisanship is plentiful, but very few have specifically studied how bipartisan cosponsorship has changed in light of the growing partisan divide, or why that particular legislative activity is even important to begin with. Using Senate cosponsorship data from the 93rd to the 115th session of Congress, this paper argues that cosponsorship patterns show an increase in hidden bipartisanship despite an increase in the polarization of roll-call votes. First, I will detail the evolution of party polarization. Having presented that background, I will then provide a brief history of bipartisanship, its advantages, and the obstacles that it has faced and continues to face in the context of the current divisive political climate

Legislating while Learning: How Staff Briefings, Cue-Taking, and Deliberation Help Legislators Take Policy Positions

This dissertation examines how legislators learn about policy proposals. It focuses on three common sources of policy information --- staff briefings, cues, and group deliberations --- to show the causal effect of information on legislators' policy positions. It uses a new approach, field experiments, that allows me to answer questions about information, institutions, and outcomes that heretofore have been difficult to study quantitatively. Results from the three studies I conducted are largely consistent with theories of legislating under imperfect information. All three studies find that information affects position-taking. On average, information increases support by reducing legislators' uncertainty. Information is most influential on bills that legislators are ideologically predisposed to support. In some respects, findings extend or challenge existing theories. Legislators appear responsive to repeated messaging. Cues and briefings interact to make legislators even more supportive of bills than we would expect from their separate effects. Cues determine a far greater proportion of positions than prior studies suggested. Finally, group deliberation appears to reduce partisan polarization in bill coalitions. All together, the studies illustrate that imperfect information constrains position-taking, that legislative staff, cue-taking, and deliberation can effectively communicate information, and that legislative institutions influence individual positions by providing policy-relevant information

“It Takes a Village”: A Re-examination of Black-Interest Advocacy, Collective Representation, & the Modern Congressional Black Caucus

This project has three explicit goals in mind. First, I aim to uncover how the CBC constructs and communicates their collective worldview to the institution. Existing literature has been essential to improving our understanding of how Black lawmakers behave in legislative bodies. However, it often falls short in considering, empirically, the contexts and commitments that are wrapped up in their agenda. Second, I seek to move beyond studying individualized legislative behaviors to examine how collective strategies are employed to promote their preferences onto the institution’s agenda. Finally, by working at the intersection of institutional and policy process literature and drawing on seldom-used methodological tools, I hoped to build on theoretical and empirical explorations into the representations of Black America in the House of Representatives. Chapter 2 examines the potential of evaluating floor speeches delivered with the intent of defining issues on their agenda. By defining policies according to their underlying attributes, Black lawmakers are able to shape policy images and shape – and potentially reshape – existing frames of policy issues that plague the communities that they represent. I also uncover that there is a decided utility in engaging in problem definition from a scholarly, organizational, and institutional perspective. A better understanding of issues provides policy actors a bit of clarity in taking on problems faced by Black Americans. In Chapter 3, I attempt to apply a theoretical explanation to changes in bill sponsorship trends in recent congressional sessions. I argue that the CBC a striking increase in legislation that receives multiple committee referrals is tied to an effort to broaden the reach of legislation within the chamber. Doing so increases the likelihood that these bills clear the committee stage. Chapter 4 set out to explore how the Black Caucus responded to institutional adversity. I find that the organization consolidated its messaging efforts through bill cosponsorship in the midst of a long-term stent in the minority party. This can potentially free up committee chairs to do the work of the party while rank and file members can invest their time and effort into issue advocacy. Taken together, it is my hope that the preceding chapters serve as a first step in re-examining the collective representation of Black interest in Congress. In doing so, I find it essential that we invest in updating our understanding of the modern Congressional Black Caucus as they increase in numbers, influence, and outcomes. This is much different than investigating the behavior Black lawmakers. Examining the Caucus means, first, examining the caucus in a way that distinguishes the organization from the preferences and behaviors of individual Black lawmakers. This also means that there should be a considerable amount of effort devoted to bringing to light organizational features and strategies that shape the collective behavior within the chamber. To this end, I prescribe four avenues that researchers should consider to broaden the examination of Black representation