The Congressional Black Caucus and Vote Cohesion: Placing the Caucus within House Voting Patterns

Pinney, Neil; Serra, George

doi:10.2307/449150

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For African Americans not represented by a CBC member, it is likely that their substantive representation does not match actual policy preference as indicated in Table 1. Previous research indicates that the CBC is a very cohesive group, even more cohesive than regional or state party delegations (Pinney and Serra 1999). That they are so cohesive likely indicates consistent constituent preferences across CBC districts.…”

Section: Hypothesis 2: Voting Patterns Of the Cbcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bill Preference: The Continued Relevance of the Congressional Black Caucus

King

2011

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) distinguish itself from the Democratic caucus? Will distinguishing itself lead to the CBC introducing legislation that is significantly different from the rest of the Democratic caucus? Will CBC members behave just as other Democrats with similar ideological temperaments? This article seeks to place the role of the contemporary CBC within the larger Democratic caucus. By tapping into bill introduction, I conclude that in most ways, the CBC is remarkably similar to the rest of the Democratic caucus, and in only small ways, is there a demonstrable difference. CBC representation ensures constituents an increased likelihood that their congressperson will introduce legislation related to the government but not in Civil Rights or Community Development. Thus, the value to liberal black voters in electing black representatives to Congress is largely in the liberal voting behavior of black representatives, not the value they bring to bill introduction. ¿Qué distingue a la Cámara del Congreso Afroamericana (CCA) de la Cámara Demócrata? ¿Puede la autodistinción hecha por la (CCA) conducir a la introducción de legislaciones que son significativamente diferentes a aquellas de la Cámara Demócrata? ¿Acaso los miembros de la (CCA) se comportan de la misma manera que otros Demócratas con un temperamento ideológico similar? Este artículo busca ubicar el rol de la CCA actual dentro de la Cámara Demócrata. Analizando la introducción de proyectos de ley, concluyo que la CCA es notablemente similar al resto de la Cámara Demócrata, y solo en pequeños detalles hay una diferencia significativa. La representación a través de la CCA garantiza a los constituyentes una mayor probabilidad de que su congresista introducirá legislaciones relacionadas al gobierno, pero no sobre derechos civiles o desarrollo de la comunidad. Por lo tanto, para el electorado negro la importancia de elegir representantes negros para el Congreso es en gran medida en el liberalismo del comportamiento electoral de los representantes afroamericanos y no en su importancia para introducir proyectos de ley.

show abstract

Section: Hypothesis 2: Voting Patterns Of the Cbcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bill Preference: The Continued Relevance of the Congressional Black Caucus

King

2011

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The sixteen independent variables in this model mirror many of the ones commonly found in research on roll-call voting in informal caucuses (for example, Pinney and Serra 1999;Hammond 2001, etc. ) as well as general voting research on American legislatures.…”

Section: Measurement Of Independent Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The expectation is that a more liberal ideology [as measured by Americans for Democratic Action ratings (Pinney and Serra 1999)] and having more Latinos in a district (Hutchings 1998) will make it more probable that a representative will support CBC positions on border amendments than more conservative members or those who represent districts with smaller Latino communities.…”

Section: House Member Ideology Percentage Of Latinos In a Districtmentioning

confidence: 99%

Border Politics in the House: The Influence of the Congressional Border Caucus on Member Votes

Mack

2012

TOPOLISJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research probes the voting behavior of the Congressional Border Caucus in the U.S. House after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. These attacks raised the consciousness of Congress, the media, and the public about the U.S-Mexico border and put the policy interests of the Border Caucus in the national spotlight. After the attacks, did caucus members adhere more closely to caucus positions that were important to border districts or more regularly vote against them? House votes on border and non-border amendments before and after the terrorist attacks are examined to determine if caucus members rallied to support the caucus majority on votes important to the border region after the attacks, or if factors such as party and ideology were more important influences on their votes. The findings reveal that Caucus members were indeed more supportive of border-related House amendments than non-Caucus members after the attacks. Yet, party and ideology still played a significant role in determining the votes of caucus and non-caucus members.

show abstract

“…The available literature deals predominantly with caucuses and their presence in the American presidential system (Bruce 1988;Pinney and Serra 1999;Edelman 2013), making limited reference (Webb 2008) to the Westminster parliamentary parties, or those of the Australian, British Commonwealth and European countries. An early exception is CF Strong (1966) in his highly thought of text, Modern political constitutions.…”

Section: Historical Origin and Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These caucuses, which are convened for special or limited purposes, comprise members from larger caucuses or sections of legislatures, such as the "Black Caucus" (Pinney and Serra 1999;Edelman 2013). Many additional caucuses in the US Congress exist predominantly to pursue factional or sectional interests (United States House of Representatives).…”

Section: Historical Origin and Structurementioning

confidence: 99%