|
Lisa A. Solowiej, Wendy L.
Martinek and Thomas L. Brunell, "Partisan Politics: The
Impact of Party in the Confirmation of Minority and Female
Federal Court Nominees," Party Politics, 11
(September, 2005), 557-577.
First Paragraph:
Peltason's observation that 'the decision as to who will
make the decisions affects what decisions will be made'
(1955: 29) brings the practical consequences of
representation into sharp focus. One key dimension of
representation is the extent to which representatives and
those they represent share similar backgrounds &endash; what
Pitkin (1967) refers to as descriptive representation.1
Students of the courts have devoted considerable resources
to understanding descriptive representation on the bench, as
evidenced by the voluminous literature regarding the
juxtaposition of race and gender and the judiciary.2 Recent
political controversy and media attention has centered on
the effects of the race and gender of nominees to the lower
federal bench on the senatorial confirmation process.
Surprisingly, while scholarly studies of the lower federal
court confirmation process now constitute a veritable
cottage industry, very few have explicitly considered the
role of the race and gender of nominees (Bell, 2002a;
Hartley, 2001; Martinek et al., 2002; Nixon and Goss, 2001)
and none have considered these characteristics in light of
the different incentive structures the two major American
political parties face.
Figures and Tables:
Table 1. Confirmation duration by minority status and
divided government control
Table 2. Confirmation duration by gender and divided
government control
Table 3. Cox Proportional Hazards model of confirmation
duration
Next to Last Paragraph:
Specifically, we suggested that differences in the
supporters of each of the two major American political
parties, particularly the differential levels of support
enjoyed by the Democratic Party from minorities and women as
well as the Republican Party's desire to shed its reputation
as being less sensitive to issues of importance to
minorities and women, translates into different incentives
for the handling of minority and female nominees. These
incentives, however, are structured by conditions of unified
versus divided government and partisan control of the
Senate. We expected that the nominations of minorities and
women would be handled most expeditiously under conditions
of unified Republican control, followed by unified
Democratic control, divided control with a Republican
president, and, finally, divided control with a Democratic
president. The results of our empirical tests suggest that,
indeed, women are most advantaged under conditions of
unified Republican control and most disadvantaged under
conditions of divided control with a Democratic president.
With regard to minorities, however, we found such nominees
to be disadvantaged when nominated by a Democratic president
facing a Republican-controlled Senate and even more
disadvantaged when nominated under conditions of unified
Republican control. Considered collectively, these findings
provide strong support for the notion that the race and
gender of nominees can have the potential to shape the
confirmation process in important ways but that effect is,
at least in part, a conditional one dependent upon partisan
politics and partisan control of government.
|