Lyndon Johnson woke up studying whip counts, went to bed reading the Congressional Record, and invested countless hours in between translating that political intelligence into a lobbying offensive. The result, famously christened “The Johnson Treatment,” remains the archetype practitioners and political scientists cite when appraising presidential leadership on Capitol Hill. Yet Beltway folklore aside, we know little about how LBJ helped forge winning legislative coalitions. Stepping back from the (countless) colorful anecdotes, this study offers a new and systematic look at Lyndon Johnson's lobbying. Specifically, after exploring theoretical models of presidential coalition building, we then investigate their operational tenets using original data on all President Johnson's contacts, with each member of Congress, in both chambers, for every day he was president.
Despite the growing body of scholarship urging congressional scholars to consider the racialization of Congress, little attention has been given to understanding how racial resentment impacts legislative behavior. To fill this gap, we ask if and how racial resentment within a member’s home district influences the positions she takes on racially tinged issues in her press releases. Due to constituent influence, we expect legislators from districts with high levels of racial resentment to issue racially tinged press releases. Through an automated content analysis of more than fifty four thousand press releases from almost four hundred U.S. House members in the 114th Congress (2015–2017), we show that Republicans from districts with high levels of racial resentment are more likely to issue press releases that attack President Barack Obama. In contrast, we find no evidence of racial resentment being positively associated with another prominent Democratic white elected official, Hillary Clinton. Our results suggest that one reason Congress may remain racially conservative even as representatives’ cycle out of office may be attributed to the electoral process.
Objectives
To generate, via application of Bayes Theorem, accurate estimates about the size of Hispanic populations in California cities from very limited data on the surnames of those living in the cities.
Methods
We make use here of the ratio of those with the name “GARCIA” to those with the name “ANDERSON” in those cities, one of which is far more likely to be Hispanic and one of which is far more likely to be non‐Hispanic.
Results
For four cities that vary dramatically in their Hispanic populations, using only two common names we are able to estimate the Hispanic population in the cities.
Conclusions
We lay the background for our surprising results by underscoring common fallacies in using surnames for purposes of ethnic identification, such as the belief that the proportion of bearers of a given name who are Hispanic can be specified as a unique percentage. We show that how “Hispanic” any given name will turn out to be is a function of the overall demography of the subpopulation being analyzed, which will also affect the distribution of names within that subpopulation.
In this study, we assess whether Blacks and/or Latinos are more likely to identify with political parties that nominate a U.S. House candidate who shares their race/ethnicity using the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Our results indicate that Blacks are more likely to identify with both the Democratic and Republican Party when they nominate successful Black candidates for the House of Representatives. To assess the temporal order of the relationship, we examine the differences in Black Democratic partisanship before and after Obama's election to the White House and changes in Republican partisanship among Blacks in districts before and after the nomination of a successful Black Republican candidate. In combination, we find that both political parties can make gains in the Black community through the nomination of co-racial candidates. While descriptive candidates consistently influence Black partisanship, we find that Latino partisanship is not significantly affected by the presence of co-ethnic candidates.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.