Concerned Coalitions: Informal Groups in the United States House of Representatives By Collin M. Miller Senior Honors Thesis Political Science University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill March 30th 2018 Approved: ________________________________ Dr. Sarah Treul-Roberts, Thesis Advisor Dr. Jason Roberts, Reader Dr. Jeff Summerlin-Long, Reader Acknowledgments The completion of this project would not have been possible without the significant contributions of many individuals, and their unwavering belief in the importance and value of, as well as my ability to complete, this endeavor. I would like to thank Congressman Mark Meadows of North Carolina’s 11th Congressional District for providing invaluable insight on the critical role informal groups have on the legislative process in the United States House of Representatives. In addition, I would like to acknowledge the dedicated staff of Congressman Meadows’ district office in Hendersonville, North Carolina, particularly Wayne King, Pamela Ward, Jenny Maybin, Clay McCreary, Kye Laughter, and Andrew West. It is while I was working as a staff assistant alongside these dedicated civil servants that I first became interested in pursuing research on the role of informal groups. Their support and insights have been crucial to this process. Academically, I owe a tremendous amount to the dedication and expertise of the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Evelyn Huber, who first introduced my fellow classmates and I to the political science research process, was critical in helping me develop the requisite skills crucial to a research project such as this. An additional thank you to Dr. Jason Roberts and Dr. Jeff Summerlin-Long who, in addition to their service as readers for this project, have taught me an incredible amount in classroom settings, helping to lay the groundwork for this research. A special thank you to Dr. Sarah Treul-Roberts who has gone above and beyond the role of advisor for this project and been a mentor, role-model, and friend for both the duration of this project and her role as an instructor, always pushing me to pursue my academic passions and constantly improve. Above all, thank you to my family who have always supported my aspirations, hopes, and dreams, including this project. Thank you to my grandmother Katherine, who first helped me discover an interest in politics and public policy, my mother and father, Katie and Bradley, who have shown unwavering support and faith in me, and to my siblings, Kailey, Luke, and Maddox, who have been my very best friends. Table of Contents I. Introduction 1 Why Informal Groups? 1 Goals of Research 1 II. Literature Review 3 III. Theory & Hypotheses 8 Research Question k 8 Independent Variables 8 Representative Conditions 8 Representative Party 8 Representative Ideology 9 Representative Personal Interest 10 District Conditions 10 District Geographic Conditions 11 District Economic Conditions 12 District Demographic Conditions 13 Dependent Variable 13 Representative Informal Group Membership 13 Hypotheses 14 Hypothesis 1 14 Sub-Hypothesis 1a 14 Sub-Hypothesis 1b 15 Sub-Hypothesis 1c 16 Hypothesis 2 16 Hypothesis 3 17 Hypothesis 4 18 IV. Methods 19 Operationalization of Independent Variables 19 Representative Party 19 Representative Ideology 19 Representative Personal Interest 19 District Geographic Conditions 20 District Economic Conditions 20 District Demographic Conditions 21 Operationalization of Dependent Variable 21 Representative Informal Group Membership 21 Informal Group Classifications 23 Axiom 1 23 Axiom 2 24 Axiom 3 24 V. Data Collection & Preliminary Results 26 Challenges of Preliminary Data Collection Process 26 Adjustment of Initial Data Collection Process 26 “Full” vs. “Listed” Membership of the 115th House of Representatives 27 Nature of Informal Group Membership in The House of Representatives 29 Role of Party 30 Role of Ideology 31 Test Case: Congressional Progressive Caucus 32 Test Case: Bipartisan Pro-Life Caucus 33 Role of Personal Interest 34 Test Case: Military Veterans Caucus 34 Role of Geographic Conditions 34 Test Case: Western Caucus 37 Role of Economic Conditions 37 Test Case: House Manufacturing Caucus 37 Role of Demographic Conditions 38 Test Case: Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus 38 VI. Conclusions & Discussion 39 Discussion of Findings 39 General Challenges of Research into Informal Groups 39 Potential for Future Research 41 VII. References 42 VIII. Appendices 44 Appendix A – Interview with Congressman Mark Meadows (NC-11) 44 Chairman of the House Freedom Caucus Appendix B – Press Release, 45 Congressional Chesapeake Bay Watershed Caucus Appendix C – Informal Group Classifications and Total Membership 46 Appendix D – DW Nominate Scores for the Full 115th US House 58 Appendix E – DW Nominate Scores for the Listed 115th US House 70 Appendix F – Census Bureau, “My Congressional District” 78 American Community Survey (North Carolina 4thand 8thDistricts) Appendix G – Census Bureau, “My Congressional District” 85 County Business Patterns (North Carolina 4th and 8th District) Tables and Figures Figure 1 – “My Congressional District” 21 as presented by the U.S. Census Bureau Figure 2 – House Administration Committee, 22 Congressional Member and Staff Organizations Figure 3 – Sample Member Website with Listed Informal Groups 22 ..... ...... Joe Wilson (SC-2) Figure 4 – Sample Data Collection Correspondence, 26 Staff of Congressman Patrick McHenry (NC-10) Figure 5 – Density Estimate for Listed 115th House 28 Figure 6 – Density of Congressional Progressive Caucus Membership 32 Figure 7 – Effects of Ideology on Bipartisan Pro-Life Caucus Membership 33 Figure 8 – U.S. Census Regions and Divisions of the United States 35 Table 1 – Informal Group Classification Examples 24 Table 2 – Informal Group Classifications 25 Table 3 – 115th House of Representatives Ideology, Full vs. Listed 27 Table 4 – Republican Party Ideology Full vs. Listed 28 Table 5 – Democratic Party Ideology Full vs. Listed 28 Table 6 – Informal Group Membership, 30 Full 115th House of Representatives Table 7 – Informal Group Membership by Party 31 Table 8 – Informal Group Membership Exclusively Based on Party 31 Table 9 – Informal Groups Based Exclusively on Ideology 31 (Moderate and Ideological) Table 10 – Informal Group Membership by Ideology 32 (Conservative, Moderate, and Liberal) Table 11 – Pearson Correlation of Ideology 33 and House Progressive Caucus Membership Table 12 – Pearson Correlation of Ideology 34 and Bipartisan Pro-Life Caucus Membership Table 13 – Pearson Correlation of Military Service 34 and Military Veterans Caucus Membership Table 14 – Informal Group Membership by Broad Region 35 Table 15 – Informal Group Membership by Specific Region 36 Table 16 – Pearson Correlation of Western Geography 37 and House Western Caucus Membership Table 17 – Logit Model of House Manufacturing Caucus Membership 38 Table 18 – Pearson Correlation of Asian Population 38 and CAPAC Membership 1 I. Introduction Why Informal Groups? “When you don’t stick together, you don’t have an effect.” — Congressman Mark Meadows (NC-11) Chairman, House Freedom Caucus Political scientists have long been interested in how legislators make their decisions in office and on the campaign trail. Excellent scientific scholarship has highlighted why legislators engage in many of the actions we care about such as bill introductions, votes, amendments, statements to the press, and more recently, on social media platforms. In the political science community, however, one crucial piece of the puzzle to understanding these behaviors of has been largely ignored: membership in informal groups. Thus far, there have been very few analyses of the role of these informal groups in the U.S. Congress, and, of those that do, an analysis of the why of Congressional informal group membership is notably absent. This research will seek to meaningfully fill this hole in the literature and develop theories of informal group membership and how they relate to legislative behavior. While grounded in the particular rules, customs, traditions, membership, and norms of the modern U.S. House of Representatives, the findings of this research will attempt to be generalizable to other similar legislative institutions such as the U.S. Senate, state legislatures, parliamentary systems, and perhaps even legislative systems around the world. Goals of Research The primary goal of this research project shall be to help fill the existing dearth of knowledge and scholarship that exists within the political science literature regarding informal 2 groups, determine what factors are relevant to members of the United States House of Representatives and their decision to join informal groups within this body, and to help develop an increased appreciation within the political science and public policy communities for these groups and their policy effects. Through the research methods developed in this project, critical and novel conclusions regarding informal groups shall be introduced and developed. This project shall additionally create a roadmap for future research and academic analysis that, while beyond the scope of this particular project, are nonetheless worthy avenues for further development. 3 II. Literature Review The political science literature is rich with competing descriptions, analyses, and explanations regarding how members of Congress choose to campaign, vote, and justify those votes to their constituents. There are, however, specific aspects of congressional