Incorporation is Not Enough: The Agenda Influence of Black Lawmakers in Congressional Committees

Abstract

Traditionally, scholars argue that the committee structure is central to the policymaking process in congress, and that those that wield the gavel in committees enjoy a great deal of influence over the legislative agenda. The most recent iterations of Congress are more diverse than ever before. With 55 members—of whom, five chair full committees and 28 sit atop subcommittees—the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) is in a place to wield a significant leverage over the legislative agenda in the 116th Congress. However, noticeable proportional gains in minority membership in Congress have yet to produce sizable policy gains for the communities they represent. An examination of bill sponsorship from the 103rd–112th congresses reveals underlying institutional forces—i.e., marginalization and negative agenda setting—leave Black lawmakers at a distinct disadvantage compared to their non-black counterparts. Bills in policy areas targeted by the CBC are subject to disproportionate winnowing in congressional committees. Unfortunately, a number of institutional resources often found to increase a bill's prospects—including placements and leadership on committees with jurisdiction over policy areas of interest—are relatively ineffective for CBC members looking to forward those key issues onto the legislative agenda.

The Deaths of Ideas in Congress

“…The descriptive representation literature suggests that in some cases paying these maintenance costs may prove unrealistic. Some measures are proposed because lawmakers' personal backgrounds help them identify an unaddressed issue and make them a particularly effective advocate (Peay 2020;Swers 2001;Volden and Wiseman 2014). The implication is that when members leave Congress, some of their ideas go with them because they are uniquely suited to pay a proposal's maintenance costs.…”