Abstract
Despite claims that diversity benefits the democratic process, critics question whether increased diversity significantly improves government responsiveness and accountability beyond electoral competition and constituency influence. The authors advance a diversity infrastructure theory to explain why and how minority legislators have kept minority interests on the congressional agenda. Using data on congressional hearings held on civil rights and social welfare from 1951 to 2004, the authors find that despite the decline of national attention to civil rights and social welfare issues in general, increased diversity in the House and to a lesser extent in the Senate is responsible for keeping minority interests on the congressional agenda.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 127-140 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Political Research Quarterly |
| Volume | 66 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 2013 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 1 No Poverty
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
-
SDG 15 Life on Land
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
-
SDG 17 Partnerships for the Goals
Keywords
- Congress
- civil rights
- diversity
- minority
- representation
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Diversity in Political Institutions and Congressional Responsiveness to Minority Interests'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS