This chapter explores whether there is a link between racial rhetorical representation and legislative behavior. We take a more nuanced examination of the link between rhetorical outreach and legislative activity than previous research. Rather than treating all discussions about a topic as being the same, we explore whether proactive (as measured by low-profile racial outreach) and reactive (as measured by high-profile racial appeals) rhetorical representation differ in their correlation to legislative activity. This allows us to better understand whether some forms of rhetorical outreach provide more accurate information to voters about the member of Congress’ legislative intent. Using our rhetorical outreach data and 18,025 primary sponsored bills, 417,925 co-sponsored bills, 108,255 statements from congressional hearings, and 1,300 unique voting scores, we find strong evidence that elected officials who engage in racial rhetorical outreach also engage in racial legislative actions across all of our measures. We also find that both high- and low-profile forms of racial rhetorical outreach are consistently significant correlates of legislative activity. However, elected officials who engage in more lower profile (i.e. proactive) forms of racial outreach are generally the most likely to advance Black political interests through the primary and co-sponsorship of legislation. Overall, racial rhetorical representation provides an accurate picture of how legislators behave in elected office. However, some forms of racial outreach provide a clearer signal of legislative priorities than others. While legislative communications are aimed at winning votes, they also are communicating to each other and forming alliances. While it is not guarantee that these bills will turn into laws, racial rhetorical representation is linked to other forms of substantive representation.

Chapter 9 explores whether racial rhetorical representation matters in the presence or absence of tangible legislation. To answer this question, we return to our experiment and inform respondents that the topic the elected official spoke about in the press release either became law or failed. After providing information about the fate of legislation, we ask respondent whether this changes their opinion of the elected official. We find that even when rhetorical representation does not lead to policy, most Black and White respondents do not view the hypothetical politician as engaging in cheap talk. Instead, their qualitative responses reveal that they understand that a single politician cannot will the passage of legislation. They also express appreciation for the elected official for speaking out about a particular topic as they perceive it as laying the groundwork for future action. In this sense, rhetorical representation without legislation still matters to voters. With that said, when rhetorical representation was matched up with the passage of pertinent legislation, respondents gave the elected official a boost in approval. Thus, speaking out about a topic and failing does not hurt elected officials, engaging in rhetorical representation and succeeding leads to a bonus in support.

In the introductory chapter, we define racial rhetorical representation and outline its significance in comparison to other forms of substantive representation. In this review, we speak about the particular meaning of this form of representation for African Americans who have historically been overlooked by political parties and rely on political actors to keep their issues on the agenda. Following this discussion, we argue that elected officials who make targeted appeals largely differ in their motivations. Some are motivated by external pressure to advance group interest, something we define as reactive racial representation. Others, we argue, are more intrinsically motivated to speak out in support of particular groups. We define this form of outreach as being proactive racial representation. We argue that the latter likely better predicts correlations with other legislative activities and will receive higher levels of approval from the targeted population. We then discuss how we use a combination of hand-coding and computer-assisted content analysis to categorize a large corpus of press releases and tweets as being centered on Black political interests or not. We use this data as the basis for much of our analysis in the manuscript. We conclude the chapter with an overview of the book and a description of several of the data sources used in this study.

In the conclusion, we speak about the growing significance of racial rhetorical representation in demonstrating that elected officials are working on behalf of their constituents in an era of increasing political gridlock. We also connect our findings to the continued importance of Black representation in a period where the salience of race and racial inequality has grown. Not only do we find that Black legislators provide Black people with the most rhetorical representation on race, we also find that they are more proactive, speaking out on issues that are not widely known and pursuing interests that are not yet part of the national agenda. Black elected officials continue to play a crucial role in advocating for Black interests, and they appear necessary for the full and equal representation of Black people. We then discuss why this advocacy is particularly important in a period where debates over crucial policies face political reckonings. For example, the advocacy behind the 1965 Voting Rights Act which has been challenged in court and expires in 2032 will likely shape Black politics into the future. We also address whether racial rhetoric will continue to be enough to voters of underrepresented groups who yearn for federal legislation to address critical societal disparities. We conclude the chapter by discussing how the Democratic Party notably has liberalized with regards to race since the 1990s and we contend that the racial advocacy by Black members of Congress is behind this liberalization.

In Chapter 3, we explore who provides Black centered racial rhetorical representation. This chapter allows us to first examine whether a link between descriptive and rhetorical representation, which has been absent in previous research on this topic (See Price 2016, Gillion 2016, Haines et al. 2019), has strengthened in recent years. In addition to this exploration, this chapter makes two important contributions to our understanding of race and rhetorical representation. First, we move beyond the Black-White paradigm and explore the rhetoric of Latino/a and Asian American elected officials. Second, rather than treating each racial/ethnic group as a monolith, we explore how the intersections of gender, class, educational attainment, and age within racial groups may shape levels of rhetorical representation. For example, do African Americans who attended a Historically Black College or University provide more rhetorical representation to co-racial individuals? Are White women more likely to engage in rhetorical representation than White men? By moving beyond the dichotomy of race (Junn and Brown 2012), we can explore the nuanced ways that individuals with various intersecting identities may provide different levels of rhetorical representation.