Conditional Representation: Presidential Rhetoric, Public Opinion, and the Representation of African American Interests

Abstract

Conventional theories of presidential representation suggest that presidents avoid courting African Americans for fear of alienating white voters, leading to the underrepresentation of “black interests.” We argue that presidential representation of black interests is conditional: when (1) African Americans prioritize issues other than economic redistribution and civil rights and (2) when these priorities overlap with those of whites, presidents should provide considerable representation of those interests. We test our theory using two new sources of data: a dataset of black and white perceptions of the US's most important problem between 1968 and 2012; and a quantitative content analysis of over 200 major presidential speeches from 1969-2012. We find that presidents provide substantial representation of black interests, but only when these interests center on non-racialized concerns and overlap with the priorities of whites. We also find that presidential priorities are often independent of the chief concerns of both African Americans and whites.

Presidents and the Congressional Black Caucus: The Racial Consequences of Electoral Incentives

“…our findings also contribute to the field of presidential representation by expanding on a small but growing literature examining the representation of subgroups in the mass public, including partisan, income, religious, and racial/ethnic subgroups (Wood 2009;Druckman and Jacobs 2011;Eshbaugh-Soha and Rottinghaus 2013;Gillion 2013;2016;Griffin and Newman 2016;Nteta, Rhodes, and tarsi 2016). Finally, our study continues the recent work of identifying conditions under which groups' representation improves or worsens (e.g., Ellis 2013; Griffin and Newman 2013;2016;Flavin 2015;Nteta, Rhodes, and tarsi 2016).…”

“I’m Not the President of Black America”: Rhetorical versus Policy Representation

“…This conclusion is a departure from the theoretical and empirical literature on descriptive representation, which has not investigated when and why major speeches and policy proposals may diverge. Still, the findings are consistent with theories of minority incorporation: in order to enact policies that benefit a disadvantaged group, elected officials in majoritywhite jurisdictions may need to frame them as a universal benefit, to avoid a backlash (Browning, Marshall, and Tabb 1984;Nteta, Rhodes, and Tarsi 2016;Wilson 1987). The potential for backlash may be even stronger when descriptive representatives advocate for their own group, as their efforts are likely to be perceived as favoritism (Hajnal 2006;Nelson, Sanbonmatsu, and McClerking 2007;Tesler 2016).…”

“…A distinctive power of the presidency is access to the public. When presidents make public appeals on behalf of a social group or policy area, they set the agenda by raising public concern about these issues (Cohen 1997;Kernell 2006; but see Nteta, Rhodes, and Tarsi 2016). For instance, Cohen (1993) argues that presidential rhetoric on civil rights has been instrumental in establishing it as part of the public agenda.…”

“…While Obama’s rhetoric on race has been analyzed (Gillion 2016), there has been no systematic assessment of his policy actions on race and race-related issues. More generally, no study has systematically compared presidents’ policy action on issues of particular concern to African Americans or disadvantaged minorities (for partial exceptions, see: Gillion 2016; Hajnal and Horowitz 2014; Nteta, Rhodes, and Tarsi 2016). Most importantly for the concept of substantive representation, there has been no systematic effort to compare rhetorical versus policy representation of an identity group.…”

Why We Love Michelle: Understanding Public Support for First Lady Michelle Obama

“…A vast array of public opinion data confirm that Michelle Obama is one of the most well-liked presidential candidate spouses over the past generation 9. Systematic analyses conducted of public opinion and presidential attention to issues shows that President Obama's issue priorities, as measured by public speeches, were largely consistent with the priorities of African Americans in the mass public (Nteta, Rhodes, and Tarsi 2016). (Elder, Frederick, and Burrell 2018).…”