Elevating Women’s Voices in Congress

• Date: 01 December 2011
• Author: Logan Dancey,Kathryn Pearson
• Published date: 01 December 2011
• DOI: 10.1177/1065912910388190

388190PRQ64410.1177/1065912910388190Pe
arson and DanceyPolitical Research Quarterly
Political Research Quarterly
64(4) 910 –923
Elevating Women’s Voices
© 2011 University of Utah
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
in Congress: Speech Participation
DOI: 10.1177/1065912910388190
http://prq.sagepub.com
in the House of Representatives
Kathryn Pearson1 and Logan Dancey1
Abstract
The authors analyze gender differences in members’ speech participation on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Speeches increase members’ visibility and voice in the legislative process, providing opportunities for members
to highlight their policy knowledge, constituents’ concerns, and partisan commitments. The authors hypothesize that
women’s underrepresentation, coupled with the related challenges that female legislators face in a predominantly male
institution, motivates congresswomen of both parties to speak at greater rates than congressmen. Analyzing over ten
thousand floor speeches during the 103rd and 109th Congresses, the authors find strong support for their hypothesis,
demonstrating that congresswomen’s participation in legislative debate increases their visibility and enhances women’s
substantive representation.
Keywords
legislative studies, women, politics, speech
There I’d be, in a war zone in Bosnia, and some
that women’s underrepresentation in the U.S. Congress,
reporter—usually female—would comment on how I was
coupled with the related challenges that female legislators
dressed, then turn to my male colleague for answers to
face in a predominantly male institution, motivates con-
questions of substance.
gresswomen of both parties to be more active and visible
than their male colleagues. We therefore hypothesize that
Rep. Susan Molinari (1998, 7)
congresswomen will speak on the House floor at greater
rates than congressmen.
In a chamber of 435 members, institutional power,
In an analysis of the 103rd (1993–94) and 109th
legislative success, and visibility are not guaranteed
Congresses (2005–6), we find strong support for our
for any member of the U.S. House of Representatives.
hypothesis in two distinct domains of congressional speech:
Congresswomen face additional hurdles serving in a
one-minute speeches, during which members can speak
male-dominated institution where women comprise only
about whatever issue they choose, and debate on impor-
17 percent of the membership in 2010. Gender stereo-
tant legislation, during which members generally focus
types that call into question women’s leadership abilities
on the particular proposal under consideration. We argue
only increase congresswomen’s incentives to distin-
congresswomen’s heightened levels of participation in
guish themselves in the political arena. As the quote from
legislative debate not only increase the visibility of con-
Representative Molinari suggests, congresswomen perceive
gresswomen but enhance women’s substantive represen-
that they must work harder than their male colleagues as
tation as well.
they seek to establish credibility with the press, colleagues,
and constituents.
Speaking on the House floor is a particularly good way
1University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
to accomplish this. Speeches increase members’ visibility
and voice in the legislative process, providing opportuni-
Corresponding Author:
ties for members to highlight their policy knowledge and
Kathryn Pearson, University of Minnesota, Department
of Political Science, 1414 Social Sciences Bldg., 267 19th Ave. South,
partisan commitments to other members and, in some
Minneapolis, MN 55455
salient cases, their constituents and the press. We expect
Email: kpearson@umn.edu

---

Pearson and Dancey
911
Political and Theoretical
more electoral experience and raised more money than
Background
their male counterparts (Pearson and McGhee 2009). New
congresswomen arrive on Capitol Hill having already
Gender, Representation,
taken extra steps to get there, and the incentives to prove
and Legislative Activity
themselves in an institution where men are the norm only
increase.
Although the gender diversity of the U.S. House of
Once in Congress, members can prove their competence
Repre sentatives has increased considerably in the past
and issue-specific knowledge through proactive behavior,
three decades, women are dramatically underrepresented.
such as bill sponsorships and floor speeches (Burden
Between 1977 and 2009, the number of women in the
2007). Through floor speeches members can engage in
House increased from seventeen to seventy-three. The big-
advertising and position taking on the issues of the
gest increase occurred in 1992, often referred to as the
day (Mayhew 1974), highlight constituents’ concerns and
“Year of the Woman,” when the number of congress-
accomplishments, and showcase their policy expertise.
women nearly doubled from twenty-eight to forty-seven.
Congresswomen may find floor speeches particularly
Women’s gains were small but steady in every election
important when seeking to demonstrate expertise on issues
cycle that followed.
that are stereotypically considered congressmen’s strengths,
Despite these gains, congresswomen remain largely
such as foreign policy and defense (Huddy and Terkildsen
outsiders in a male-dominated institution. Scholars argue
1993; Sanbonmatsu 2002a; Lawless 2004). Members can
Congress is a gendered institution (Rosenthal 2002; Duerst-
use floor speeches to communicate issue-specific knowl-
Lahti 2002) where norms of masculinity prevail. Scholars
edge to one another. Also debate on high-profile legislation
and politicians alike have shown examples of gendered,
often enters the public sphere, with floor speeches quoted by
and race-gendered, bias on the part of some congressmen
print reporters, covered on television news, and, more
against congresswomen, including overt sex discrimina-
recently, posted on YouTube, often by members them-
tion and hostility, ignoring the contributions of congress-
selves. Speech making is thus one way congresswomen
women, and treating congresswomen as tokens rather than
can seek to increase their visibility and stature with both
taking them seriously (e.g., Hawkesworth 2003; Boxer
colleagues and constituents.
1993; Foerstel and Foerstel 1996; Margolies-Mezvinsky
Congresswomen can also use floor speeches to advo-
1994; Schroeder 1998). Since the 1990s, both Democratic
cate for women’s policy interests (see Osborn and Mendez
and Republican congresswomen have been more likely than
2010; Shogan 2002; Walsh 2002). Congresswomen act
congressmen to face challengers when they compete for
as surrogate representatives for women across America
their colleagues’ votes in leadership elections, reducing their
(Carroll 2002), and a significant body of research on
chances of victory (Rosenthal 2008). Congresswomen may
women and legislative representation shows that congress-
also face higher hurdles proving their credentials to voters,
women are more likely than congressmen to sponsor,
as gender stereotypes suggest that men are more likely than
cosponsor, and vote for bills promoting “women’s issues”
women to possess leadership traits (e.g., Eagly and Karau
such as child care, women’s health, access to abortion,
2002; Huddy and Terkildsen 1993). Congresswomen in both
domestic violence prevention, and pay equity (Burrell
parties thus face additional incentives to prove themselves to
1994; Carroll 1994, 2002; Dodson 1998, 2006; Gelb and
their colleagues and constituents alike.
Palley 1996; Gerrity, Osborn, and Mendez 2007; Norton
The notion that women in politics perceive that they
1999; Swers 1998, 2002). Shogan (2002) finds that both
must work harder than men is supported by research on
Democratic and Republican congresswomen frequently
congressional elections and candidate emergence. Drawing
speak about the impact of legislation on women in par-
on a national survey of women and men in professions
ticular, although there are partisan differences in the pol-
that serve as a pipeline to elected office, Lawless and Fox
icy issues they discuss.
(2005) find that women are significantly less likely than
In addition, in an era when party leaders value loyalty
men with similar professional and personal characteris-
to the party and its program, speeches give congress-
tics to think that they are qualified to run for office. These
women opportunities to highlight the accomplishments
findings are consistent with research showing that women
of their own party and attack the other party, proving their
are more concerned than men with their legitimacy as can-
partisan credentials above and beyond their voting record.
didates, likelihood of victory, and ability to raise money
Republican leader John Boehner (R-OH), for example,
(Dodson 1998; Fowler and McClure 1989; Fulton et al.
used his Web site to post a partisan “one-minute speech
2006; Sanbonmatsu 2002b; Jenkins 2007). These concerns
of the day” in the 110th Congress (2007–8).1 Since con-
translate into gender differences in congressional candi-
gresswomen, regardless of their actual voting records,
dacies: while nonincumbent women running for Congress
are viewed as more liberal than congressmen (McDermott
from 1984 to 2006 won at the same rate as men, they had
1997), Republican congresswomen have particularly strong

---

912
Political Research Quarterly 64(4...