Search

Information is one of the most prized commodities in the legislative decision-making process. However, gaining access to high quality information through traditional institutional means in decreasing, and institutional and interpersonal marginalization puts Black lawmakers at a distinct disadvantage. This article explains how Black lawmakers rely on extra-party institutions to fulfill the desire for information when the institution falls short. In fulfilling this responsibility as the key source of information on conditions that plague the Black community, the organization has developed an information infrastructure—a combination of internal and external mechanisms designed to improve their research and informational capacity. To highlight the utility of the information infrastructure, we examine Special Order Hour Speeches delivered from the 113th through the 115th Congress (2013–2018). We find, the CBC information infrastructure provides its members access to highly specialized information without having to sacrifice the quality of sources to account for information search costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Nonviolent protests have been at the center of minority interest advocacy for nearly a century, as marginalized communities air their grievances in search for substantive policy change. While groups organize and demonstrate in a peaceful manner, there is no guarantee that onlookers will perceive them as such. We find it necessary to explore what factors shape perceptions of social movement protests and how the racial composition of a demonstration can elicit dramatically different responses from onlookers. Methods: To examine the impact of racial identity on protest evaluations, we conduct a survey experiment on a total of 921 respondents. We simulate a media report concerning a Black Lives Matter protest to determine how subtle changes in the racial composition of the demonstration elicit varying perceptions of a potential for violence. Results: We find that protests that comprise all‐Black participants are perceived to have a higher probability to end in violence than more diverse demonstrations. These findings come despite an assurance that the protest in question was peaceful. Consistent with minority threat theory, these perceptions are largely driven by the sentiments of white respondents. Conclusion: We argue that ill‐conceived threat perceptions, rooted in the racial composition of Black Lives Matter protests, complicate the mission of those charged with making visible the plight of Black Americans. Even when Black protesters adhere to the "rules" of non‐violent protest, there is no guarantee that the biases of onlookers will not drown out their efforts. These findings have wide reaching implications on the exercise of First Amendment right to protest, the role of the media in reporting on protests, and the expectations of government interactions with protesters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]