A Different Kind of Representation: Black and Latino Descriptive Representation and the Role of Ideological Cuing

• Author: Rodney E. Hero,Robert R. Preuhs
• Date: 01 March 2011
• Published date: 01 March 2011
• DOI: 10.1177/1065912909346739
• Subject Matter: Articles

Political Research Quarterly

64(1) 157 –171

© 2011 University of Utah

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1065912909346739

http://prq.sagepub.com

A Different Kind of Representation: Black

and Latino Descriptive Representation

and the Role of Ideological Cuing

Robert R. Preuhs1 and Rodney E. Hero2

Abstract

Most scholarship on minority descriptive representation focuses on whether minority legislators are “more” supportive

of minority concerns than white legislators but does not address how descriptive representatives differ in the use of

decision-making cues when advocating for minority interests. Drawing on data from four Congresses and comparing

two sets of minority group representatives with their white counterpar ts and each other, the authors show that an

important effect of descriptive representation is that racial/ethnic minority representatives are uniquely influenced

in their advocacy of minority interests by cues that stand apart from the conventional liberal/conservative political

ideological frame.

Keywords

Congress, descriptive representation, black politics, Latino politics

Representation is a fundamental concern in democratic

polities (Pitkin 1967), and descriptive and substantive

representation are especially significant in racially and

ethnically diverse societies (Mansbridge 1999). The

potential value of minority descriptive representation, or

the election of representatives who share the racial or

ethnic background of their constituents, is that these offi-

cials will not only look different from but also act

differently than nonminority representatives and, thus,

presumably be stronger advocates for minority concerns.

This difference between racial and ethnic minority versus

nonminority legislators is ostensibly driven by shared

experiences that are unique and particularly important to

minority groups.

In this vein, Mansbridge (1999) and others argue that

the value of descriptive representation is most pro-

nounced as these shared experiences lead to the

identification and advocacy of issues that are important

to minority group members but are uncrystallized in

dominant political discourse and/or by dominant social

groups. Descriptive representation matters, then, not only

or primarily as a means to ensure “more” or “less” advo-

cacy of issues that are already addressed in major political

cleavages but also in how representatives approach public

policy decisions and the cues employed as their represen-

tatives advocate for minority interests.

This conception of the importance and potential conse-

quences of descriptive representation underlies the

theoretical assumptions of a growing body of research. Yet,

congressional-level analyses of the effects of descriptive

representation almost universally employ research designs

that do not capture the uniqueness of descriptive representa-

tion as conceived by Mansbridge (1999) and others

(cf. Canon 1999; Grofman, Handley, and Niemi 1992).

Rather, the current literature generally examines the effects

of descriptive representatives by employing broad indica-

tors of ideology such as NOMINATE scores (Poole and

Rosenthal 1997; McCarty, Poole, and Rosenthal 2006)

or indicators of minority advocacy group ratings, such as

Leadership Council on Civil Rights (LCCR) scores or

National Association for the Advancement of Colored

People (NAACP) scores, as dependent variables and esti-

mates the difference between minority legislators and

nonminority legislators.1 In short, much of the current state

1Metropolitan State College of Denver, Denver, CO, USA

2University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA

Corresponding Author:

Robert R. Preuhs, Department of Political Science, Metropolitan State

College of Denver, Campus Box 43, PO Box 173362, Denver, CO

80217-3362, USA; phone: (303) 556-4523; fax: (303) 556-2716

E-mail: rpreuhs@mscd.edu