View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy The Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Coalitional Representation of Latinxs in the U.S. House of Representatives A Dissertation SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY AVRAM EUGENE MUNOZ IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY KATHRYN PEARSON AUGUST 2019 © Copyright by Avram Eugene Munoz 2019 Acknowledgments The process of planning, researching, and writing this dissertation has taken longer than I thought it would when I started graduate school in 2013. Through the years, though, I have received an immense amount of support from many people that has helped me see this project through to the end. First and foremost, I must thank the Department of Political Science at the University of Minnesota. Not only did they admit me to their graduate program, the Department also provided support at all stages of the project. This support made it possible for me to make multiple trips to Washington, D.C. to conduct my archival research and interviews with CHC members and staffers, as well as carry out research on the other components of the dissertation and write everything up. I spent about two months reading through the archived documents of the CHC at the National Archives Building in Washington, D.C. This was both a long time to spend in the reading room, but also nowhere near enough time to delve into the history of the CHC. The archivists helped me figure out which specific records of the CHC’s I might look into, even when sometimes they had to inform me that the records were unavailable because they contained sensitive information. I am also thankful to the CHC members and congressional staffers who agreed to be interviewed for this project. They did not have to agree to talk with me when I showed up unannounced at their offices in the House office buildings, or when I emailed them out of the blue with a list of questions asking if they would be available to speak with me. I am also extremely thankful that the members of the CHC chose to deposit their records at the National Archives in the mid-1990s when the future of the organization was uncertain—had they not made this decision, it is unlikely the project would have survived in its current form. I cannot state enough how thankful I am to my advisor, Kathryn Pearson, for all she has done for me in the last six years. Before taking her graduate seminar on Congress I did not think I was going to write a dissertation focusing on institutions in any sense; I stumbled upon the CHC while conducting the research for that term paper, and I haven’t looked back. She has provided constructive and insightful feedback on the multitude of drafts for each chapter, pushing me to be as precise as possible in my discussion of the CHC and its role in Congress while also allowing me the freedom to explore different ways to think and write about representation in Congress even when this lead to me taking longer than I wanted to move forward with various stages of the project. I could not have asked for a better advisor throughout this process. Liz Beaumont, Michael Minta, Joe Soss, and Jane Sumner provided critical insights and feedback throughout this project, whether about the theoretical framing or the gritty details of my statistical models in the empirical chapters. It is because of their support in introducing me to a variety of ways of thinking about and doing political i science that I even felt comfortable using both qualitative and quantitative methods, and they have all helped me find a balance between the two that, I think, makes this project stronger than had I only used a qualitative or quantitative approach. I also cannot state enough how grateful I am for my fellow graduate students at the University of Minnesota. Whether it was commiserating over our reading load during coursework, asking tough questions during colloquia, or swapping drafts of dissertation chapters to read and give feedback, we have helped each other grow as scholars and figure out how to present our ideas in ways that are accessible across the subfields of political science. I would not trade the friendships I have made in these six years for anything. As always, my parents, brother, and sister have been nothing but supportive from the moment I moved to Minneapolis. This, even if it meant I was shut up in my room reading and writing (or doing my political theory preliminary exam) when I was supposed to be visiting for the holidays. Most important of all, I have to thank Laura. At this point I’ve been in graduate school for about half the time that we have been together, and through it all she has always been supportive. Sometimes that meant reading a draft of a paper or a chapter or making sure I remembered to eat in the middle of marathon writing sessions, but other times it meant telling me to shut my laptop and binge a show on Netflix with her. Our conservation about what it meant to each of us to be Latino/a when we were watching Selena has stuck with me, and influenced a lot of my thinking when writing about identity. I would not be where or who I am today without her. Even when she was pregnant with Nico and I was finishing writing my dissertation, she made sure to remind me to breathe and to appreciate things like sleep (which, thanks to Nico, I no longer get on a regular basis). The following pages reflect her support just as much as they do my own work. ii To Laura and Nico. iii Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................. v List of Figures ............................................................................................................... vi 1| Coalitional Representation in the House of Representatives ................................. 1 2| Crafting the Coalition: The History of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus ..... 35 3| Representing the Community: The CHC and Latinx Identity ............................ 80 4| The CHC and Agenda-Setting in the House ....................................................... 116 5| Taking Care of Business: The Legislative Effectiveness of the CHC ............... 162 6| Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 222 Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 245 Appendices ................................................................................................................. 257 iv List of Tables 2.1 Number of CHC Members by Party, 95th-103rd 47 Congress 2.2 Number of CHC Members by Party, 104th-109th 57 Congress 2.3 Number of CHC Members and Share of 61 Democratic Caucus, 110th-114th Congress 2.4 National Origin Groups in the CHC, 95th-114th 69 Congress 2.5 Gender in the CHC, 95th-116th Congress 74 4.1 Effect of CHC Agenda on Democratic Agenda, 153 All Eras 4.2 Effect of CHC Agenda on Democratic Agenda, 156 by Era 5.1 Effect of Level of CHC Support on Legislative 180 Success, All Eras 5.2 Effect of Level of CHC Support on Legislative 184 Success in Different Eras 5.3 CHC Legislative Effectiveness by Issue Area 188 5.4 Content of CHC Opposition Agenda by Type of 192 Legislative Item 5.5 CHC Blocking Effectiveness on 193 Appropriations/Budget Measures 5.6 CHC Blocking Effectiveness on non- 195 Appropriations Measures 5.7 CHC Blocking Effectiveness During 197 Democratic Control 5.8 CHC Blocking Effectiveness During 199 Republican Control 6.1 Latinx Vote Choice in 2018 Senate and 242 Governor Races v List of Figures 2.1 Average Ideology for CHC and Democratic 66 Caucus, 95th-114th Congress 2.2 Average Percent Latinxs in CHC Districts, 71 95th-114th Congress 2.3 Average Percent of National Origin Groups 72 within Latinx Population of CHC Districts, 95th-114th Congress 4.1 Issue Areas on CHC Agendas, 95th-114th 135 Congress 4.2 Legislative Items on CHC Agendas by Issue 138 Area, 95th-114th Congress 4.3 Number of Legislative Items on CHC 141 Agendas by Type, 95th-114th Congress 4.4 2006 Latino National Survey, Most Important 144 Problem Responses by National Origin vi 1| Coalitional Representation in the House of Representatives There is no difficulty in showing that the ideally best form of government is that in which the sovereignty, or supreme controlling power in the last resort, is vested in the entire aggregate of the community, every citizen not only having a voice in the exercise of that ultimate sovereignty, but being, at least occasionally, called on to take an actual part in the government by the personal discharge of some public function, local or general. –John Stuart Mill (1991, 64) Oppression consists in systematic institutional processes which prevent some people from learning and using satisfying and expansive skills in socially recognized settings, or institutionalized social processes which inhibit people’s ability to play and communicate with others or to express their feelings and perspective on social life in contexts where others can listen. –Iris Marion Young (1990, 38) Writing in in 1861, John Stuart Mill attempted to articulate a reason for why a representative form of government was, in fact, the ideal form of government for any society to have. One of Mill’s most important arguments for this form of government derived from the belief that the community, or the governed population, provides the basis for all governmental power and authority. Consequently, it only makes sense that every citizen ought to be able to participate in the exercise of this “ultimate sovereignty” in some way. Because Mill perceives true democracy, wherein all people are able to speak and participate directly in political decision making processes, as a logistical impossibility, he settles on representative government as the ideal, assuming that elected representatives will take actions that promote the general good of the community rather than their own selfish interests.