11.3 Congressional Representation
Learning objectives.
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Explain the basics of representation
- Describe the extent to which Congress as a body represents the U.S. population
- Explain the concept of collective representation
- Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings
The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office. In this section, we will explore three different models of representation and the concept of descriptive representation. We will look at the way members of Congress navigate the challenging terrain of representation as they serve, and all the many predictable and unpredictable consequences of the decisions they make.
TYPES OF REPRESENTATION: LOOKING OUT FOR CONSTITUENTS
By definition and title, senators and House members are representatives. This means they are intended to be drawn from local populations around the country so they can speak for and make decisions for those local populations, their constituents, while serving in their respective legislative houses. That is, representation refers to an elected leader’s looking out for constituents while carrying out the duties of the office. 26
Theoretically, the process of constituents voting regularly and reaching out to their representatives helps these congresspersons better represent them. It is considered a given by some in representative democracies that representatives will seldom ignore the wishes of constituents, especially on salient issues that directly affect the district or state. In reality, the job of representing in Congress is often quite complicated, and elected leaders do not always know where their constituents stand. Nor do constituents always agree on everything. Navigating their sometimes contradictory demands and balancing them with the demands of the party, powerful interest groups, ideological concerns, the legislative body, their own personal beliefs, and the country as a whole can be a complicated and frustrating process for representatives.
Traditionally, representatives have seen their role as that of a delegate, a trustee, or someone attempting to balance the two. Representatives who see themselves as delegates believe they are empowered merely to enact the wishes of constituents. Delegates must employ some means to identify the views of their constituents and then vote accordingly. They are not permitted the liberty of employing their own reason and judgment while acting as representatives in Congress. This is the delegate model of representation .
In contrast, a representative who understands their role to be that of a trustee believes they are entrusted by the constituents with the power to use good judgment to make decisions on the constituents’ behalf. In the words of the eighteenth-century British philosopher Edmund Burke, who championed the trustee model of representation , “Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests . . . [it is rather] a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole.” 27 In the modern setting, trustee representatives will look to party consensus, party leadership, powerful interests, the member’s own personal views, and national trends to better identify the voting choices they should make.
Understandably, few if any representatives adhere strictly to one model or the other. Instead, most find themselves attempting to balance the important principles embedded in each. Political scientists call this the politico model of representation . In it, members of Congress act as either trustee or delegate based on rational political calculations about who is best served, the constituency or the nation.
For example, every representative, regardless of party or conservative versus liberal leanings, must remain firm in support of some ideologies and resistant to others. On the political right, an issue that demands support might be gun rights; on the left, it might be a woman’s right to an abortion. For votes related to such issues, representatives will likely pursue a delegate approach. For other issues, especially complex questions the public at large has little patience for, such as subtle economic reforms, representatives will tend to follow a trustee approach. This is not to say their decisions on these issues run contrary to public opinion. Rather, it merely means they are not acutely aware of or cannot adequately measure the extent to which their constituents support or reject the proposals at hand. It could also mean that the issue is not salient to their constituents. Congress works on hundreds of different issues each year, and constituents are likely not aware of the particulars of most of them.
DESCRIPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS
In some cases, representation can seem to have very little to do with the substantive issues representatives in Congress tend to debate. Instead, proper representation for some is rooted in the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and sexual identity of the representatives themselves. This form of representation is called descriptive representation .
At one time, there was relatively little concern about descriptive representation in Congress. A major reason is that until well into the twentieth century, White men of European background constituted an overwhelming majority of the voting population. African Americans were routinely deprived of the opportunity to participate in democracy, and Hispanics and other minority groups were fairly insignificant in number and excluded by the states. While women in many western states could vote sooner, all women were not able to exercise their right to vote nationwide until passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920, and they began to make up more than 5 percent of either chamber only in the 1990s.
Many advances in women’s rights have been the result of women’s greater engagement in politics and representation in the halls of government, especially since the founding of the National Organization for Women in 1966 and the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) in 1971. The NWPC was formed by Bella Abzug ( Figure 11.11 ), Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, and other leading feminists to encourage women’s participation in political parties, elect women to office, and raise money for their campaigns. For example, Patsy Mink (D-HI) ( Figure 11.11 ), the first Asian American woman elected to Congress, was the coauthor of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Title IX of which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Mink had been interested in fighting discrimination in education since her youth, when she opposed racial segregation in campus housing while a student at the University of Nebraska. She went to law school after being denied admission to medical school because of her gender. Like Mink, many other women sought and won political office, many with the help of the NWPC. Today, EMILY’s List, a PAC founded in 1985 to help elect pro-choice Democratic women to office, plays a major role in fundraising for female candidates. In the 2018 midterm elections, thirty-four women endorsed by EMILY's List won election to the U.S. House. 28 In 2020, the Republicans took a page from the Democrats' playbook when they made the recruitment and support of quality female candidates a priority and increased the number of Republican women in the House from thirteen to twenty-eight, including ten seats formerly held by Democrats. 29
In the wake of the Civil Rights Movement , African American representatives also began to enter Congress in increasing numbers. In 1971, to better represent their interests, these representatives founded the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), an organization that grew out of a Democratic select committee formed in 1969. Founding members of the CBC include Ralph Metcalfe (D-IL), a former sprinter from Chicago who had medaled at both the Los Angeles (1932) and Berlin (1936) Olympic Games, and Shirley Chisholm, a founder of the NWPC and the first African American woman to be elected to the House of Representatives ( Figure 11.12 ).
In recent decades, Congress has become much more descriptively representative of the United States. The 117th Congress, which began in January 2021 had a historically large percentage of racial and ethnic minorities. African Americans made up the largest percentage, with sixty-two members (including two delegates and two people who would soon resign to serve in the executive branch), while Latinos accounted for fifty-four members (including two delegates and the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico), up from thirty just a decade before. 30 Yet, demographically speaking, Congress as a whole is still a long way from where the country is and is composed of largely White wealthy men. For example, although more than half the U.S. population is female, only 25 percent of Congress is. Congress is also overwhelmingly Christian ( Figure 11.13 ).
REPRESENTING CONSTITUENTS
Ethnic, racial, gender, or ideological identity aside, it is a representative’s actions in Congress that ultimately reflect their understanding of representation. Congress members’ most important function as lawmakers is writing, supporting, and passing bills. And as representatives of their constituents, they are charged with addressing those constituents’ interests. Historically, this job has included what some have affectionately called “bringing home the bacon” but what many (usually those outside the district in question) call pork-barrel politics . As a term and a practice, pork-barrel politics—federal spending on projects designed to benefit a particular district or set of constituents—has been around since the nineteenth century, when barrels of salt pork were both a sign of wealth and a system of reward. While pork-barrel politics are often deplored during election campaigns, and earmarks—funds appropriated for specific projects—are no longer permitted in Congress (see feature box below), legislative control of local appropriations nevertheless still exists. In more formal language, allocation , or the influencing of the national budget in ways that help the district or state, can mean securing funds for a specific district’s project like an airport, or getting tax breaks for certain types of agriculture or manufacturing.
Get Connected!
Language and metaphor.
The language and metaphors of war and violence are common in politics. Candidates routinely “smell blood in the water,” “battle for delegates,” go “head-to-head,” and “make heads roll.” But references to actual violence aren’t the only metaphorical devices commonly used in politics. Another is mentions of food. Powerful speakers frequently “throw red meat to the crowds”; careful politicians prefer to stick to “meat-and-potato issues”; and representatives are frequently encouraged by their constituents to “bring home the bacon.” And the way members of Congress typically “bring home the bacon” is often described with another agricultural metaphor, the “earmark.”
In ranching, an earmark is a small cut on the ear of a cow or other animal to denote ownership. Similarly, in Congress, an earmark is a mark in a bill that directs some of the bill’s funds to be spent on specific projects or for specific tax exemptions. Since the 1980s, the earmark has become a common vehicle for sending money to various projects around the country. Many a road, hospital, and airport can trace its origins back to a few skillfully drafted earmarks.
Relatively few people outside Congress had ever heard of the term before the 2008 presidential election, when Republican nominee Senator John McCain touted his career-long refusal to use the earmark as a testament to his commitment to reforming spending habits in Washington. 31 McCain’s criticism of the earmark as a form of corruption cast a shadow over a previously common legislative practice. As the country sank into recession and Congress tried to use spending bills to stimulate the economy, the public grew more acutely aware of its earmarking habits. Congresspersons then were eager to distance themselves from the practice. In fact, the use of earmarks to encourage Republicans to help pass health care reform actually made the bill less popular with the public.
In 2011, after Republicans took over the House, they outlawed earmarks. But with deadlocks and stalemates becoming more common, some quiet voices have begun asking for a return to the practice. They argue that Congress works because representatives can satisfy their responsibilities to their constituents by making deals. The earmarks are those deals. By taking them away, Congress has hampered its own ability to “bring home the bacon.”
Are earmarks a vital part of legislating or a corrupt practice that was rightly jettisoned? Pick a cause or industry, and investigate whether any earmarks ever favored it, or research the way earmarks have hurt or helped your state or district, and decide for yourself.
Follow-up activity: Find out where your congressional representative stands on the ban on earmarks and write to support or dissuade them.
Such budgetary allocations aren’t always looked upon favorably by constituents. Consider, for example, the passage of the ACA in 2010. The desire for comprehensive universal health care had been a driving position of the Democrats since at least the 1960s. During the 2008 campaign, that desire was so great among both Democrats and Republicans that both parties put forth plans. When the Democrats took control of Congress and the presidency in 2009, they quickly began putting together their plan. Soon, however, the politics grew complex, and the proposed plan became very contentious for the Republican Party.
Nevertheless, the desire to make good on a decades-old political promise compelled Democrats to do everything in their power to pass something. They offered sympathetic members of the Republican Party valuable budgetary concessions; they attempted to include allocations they hoped the opposition might feel compelled to support; and they drafted the bill in a purposely complex manner to avoid future challenges. These efforts, however, had the opposite effect. The Republican Party’s constituency interpreted the allocations as bribery and the bill as inherently flawed, and felt it should be scrapped entirely. The more Democrats dug in, the more frustrated the Republicans became ( Figure 11.14 ).
The Republican opposition, which took control of the House during the 2010 midterm elections, promised constituents they would repeal the law. Their attempts were complicated, however, by the fact that Democrats still held the Senate and the presidency. Yet, the desire to represent the interests of their constituents compelled Republicans to use another tool at their disposal, the symbolic vote. During the 112th and 113th Congresses, Republicans voted more than sixty times to either repeal or severely limit the reach of the law. They understood these efforts had little to no chance of ever making it to the president’s desk. And if they did, he would certainly have vetoed them. But it was important for these representatives to demonstrate to their constituents that they understood their wishes and were willing to act on them.
Historically, representatives have been able to balance their role as members of a national legislative body with their role as representatives of a smaller community. The Obamacare fight, however, gave a boost to the growing concern that the power structure in Washington divides representatives from the needs of their constituency. 32 This has exerted pressure on representatives to the extent that some now pursue a more straightforward delegate approach to representation. Indeed, following the 2010 election, a handful of Republicans began living in their offices in Washington, convinced that by not establishing a residence in Washington, they would appear closer to their constituents at home. 33
COLLECTIVE REPRESENTATION AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL
The concept of collective representation describes the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole. That is, it considers whether the institution itself represents the American people, not just whether a particular member of Congress represents their district. Predictably, it is far more difficult for Congress to maintain a level of collective representation than it is for individual members of Congress to represent their own constituents. Not only is Congress a mixture of different ideologies, interests, and party affiliations, but the collective constituency of the United States has an even-greater level of diversity. Nor is it a solution to attempt to match the diversity of opinions and interests in the United States with those in Congress. Indeed, such an attempt would likely make it more difficult for Congress to maintain collective representation. Its rules and procedures require Congress to use flexibility, bargaining, and concessions. Yet, it is this flexibility and these concessions, which many now interpret as corruption, that tend to engender the high public disapproval ratings experienced by Congress.
After many years of deadlocks and bickering on Capitol Hill, the national perception of Congress has tended to run under 20 percent approval in recent years, with large majorities disapproving. Through mid-2021, the Congress, narrowly under Democratic control, was receiving higher approval ratings, above 30 percent. However, congressional approval still lags public approval of the presidency and Supreme Court by a considerable margin. In the two decades following the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s, the national approval rating of Congress hovered between 30 and 40 percent, then trended upward in the 1990s, before trending downward in the twenty-first century. 34
Yet, incumbent reelections have remained largely unaffected. The reason has to do with the remarkable ability of many in the United States to separate their distaste for Congress from their appreciation for their own representative. Paradoxically, this tendency to hate the group but love one’s own representative actually perpetuates the problem of poor congressional approval ratings. The reason is that it blunts voters’ natural desire to replace those in power who are earning such low approval ratings.
As decades of polling indicate, few events push congressional approval ratings above 50 percent. Indeed, when the ratings are graphed, the two noticeable peaks are at 57 percent in 1998 and 84 percent in 2001 ( Figure 11.15 ). In 1998, according to Gallup polling, the rise in approval accompanied a similar rise in other mood measures, including President Bill Clinton ’s approval ratings and general satisfaction with the state of the country and the economy. In 2001, approval spiked after the September 11 terrorist attacks and the Bush administration launched the "War on Terror," sending troops first to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. War has the power to bring majorities of voters to view their Congress and president in an overwhelmingly positive way. 35
Nevertheless, all things being equal, citizens tend to rate Congress more highly when things get done and more poorly when things do not get done. For example, during the first half of President Obama’s first term, Congress’s approval rating reached a relative high of about 40 percent. Both houses were dominated by members of the president’s own party, and many people were eager for Congress to take action to end the deep recession and begin to repair the economy. Millions were suffering economically, out of work, or losing their jobs, and the idea that Congress was busy passing large stimulus packages, working on finance reform, and grilling unpopular bank CEOs and financial titans appealed to many. Approval began to fade as the Republican Party slowed the wheels of Congress during the tumultuous debates over Obamacare and reached a low of 9 percent following the federal government shutdown in October 2013.
One of the events that began the approval rating’s downward trend was Congress’s divisive debate over national deficits. A deficit is what results when Congress spends more than it has available. It then conducts additional deficit spending by increasing the national debt. Many modern economists contend that during periods of economic decline, the nation should run deficits, because additional government spending has a stimulative effect that can help restart a sluggish economy. Despite this benefit, voters rarely appreciate deficits. They see Congress as spending wastefully during a time when they themselves are cutting costs to get by.
The disconnect between the common public perception of running a deficit and its legitimate policy goals is frequently exploited for political advantage. For example, while running for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama slammed the deficit spending of the George W. Bush presidency, saying it was “unpatriotic.” This sentiment echoed complaints Democrats had been issuing for years as a weapon against President Bush’s policies. Following the election of President Obama and the Democratic takeover of the Senate, the concern over deficit spending shifted parties, with Republicans championing a spendthrift policy as a way of resisting Democratic policies.
Link to Learning
Find your representative at the U.S. House website and then explore their website and social media accounts to see whether the issues on which your representative spends time are the ones you think are most appropriate.
This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.
Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.
Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/1-introduction
- Authors: Glen Krutz, Sylvie Waskiewicz, PhD
- Publisher/website: OpenStax
- Book title: American Government 3e
- Publication date: Jul 28, 2021
- Location: Houston, Texas
- Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/1-introduction
- Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/11-3-congressional-representation
© Jul 18, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.
Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.
12.3 Congressional Representation
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Explain the basics of representation
- Describe the extent to which Congress as a body represents the U.S. population
- Explain the concept of collective representation
- Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings
The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office. In this section, we will explore three different models of representation and the concept of descriptive representation. We will look at the way members of Congress navigate the challenging terrain of representation as they serve, and all the many predictable and unpredictable consequences of the decisions they make.
TYPES OF REPRESENTATION: LOOKING OUT FOR CONSTITUENTS
By definition and title, senators and House members are representatives. This means they are intended to be drawn from local populations around the country so they can speak for and make decisions for those local populations, their constituents, while serving in their respective legislative houses. That is, representation refers to an elected leader’s looking out for constituents while carrying out the duties of the office. 26
Theoretically, the process of constituents voting regularly and reaching out to their representatives helps these congresspersons better represent them. It is considered a given by some in representative democracies that representatives will seldom ignore the wishes of constituents, especially on salient issues that directly affect the district or state. In reality, the job of representing in Congress is often quite complicated, and elected leaders do not always know where their constituents stand. Nor do constituents always agree on everything. Navigating their sometimes contradictory demands and balancing them with the demands of the party, powerful interest groups, ideological concerns, the legislative body, their own personal beliefs, and the country as a whole can be a complicated and frustrating process for representatives.
Traditionally, representatives have seen their role as that of a delegate, a trustee, or someone attempting to balance the two. Representatives who see themselves as delegates believe they are empowered merely to enact the wishes of constituents. Delegates must employ some means to identify the views of their constituents and then vote accordingly. They are not permitted the liberty of employing their own reason and judgment while acting as representatives in Congress. This is the delegate model of representation .
In contrast, a representative who understands their role to be that of a trustee believes they are entrusted by the constituents with the power to use good judgment to make decisions on the constituents’ behalf. In the words of the eighteenth-century British philosopher Edmund Burke, who championed the trustee model of representation , “Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests . . . [it is rather] a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole.” 27 In the modern setting, trustee representatives will look to party consensus, party leadership, powerful interests, the member’s own personal views, and national trends to better identify the voting choices they should make.
Understandably, few if any representatives adhere strictly to one model or the other. Instead, most find themselves attempting to balance the important principles embedded in each. Political scientists call this the politico model of representation . In it, members of Congress act as either trustee or delegate based on rational political calculations about who is best served, the constituency or the nation.
For example, every representative, regardless of party or conservative versus liberal leanings, must remain firm in support of some ideologies and resistant to others. On the political right, an issue that demands support might be gun rights; on the left, it might be a woman’s right to an abortion. For votes related to such issues, representatives will likely pursue a delegate approach. For other issues, especially complex questions the public at large has little patience for, such as subtle economic reforms, representatives will tend to follow a trustee approach. This is not to say their decisions on these issues run contrary to public opinion. Rather, it merely means they are not acutely aware of or cannot adequately measure the extent to which their constituents support or reject the proposals at hand. It could also mean that the issue is not salient to their constituents. Congress works on hundreds of different issues each year, and constituents are likely not aware of the particulars of most of them.
DESCRIPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS
In some cases, representation can seem to have very little to do with the substantive issues representatives in Congress tend to debate. Instead, proper representation for some is rooted in the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and sexual identity of the representatives themselves. This form of representation is called descriptive representation .
At one time, there was relatively little concern about descriptive representation in Congress. A major reason is that until well into the twentieth century, White men of European background constituted an overwhelming majority of the voting population. African Americans were routinely deprived of the opportunity to participate in democracy, and Hispanics and other minority groups were fairly insignificant in number and excluded by the states. While women in many western states could vote sooner, all women were not able to exercise their right to vote nationwide until passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920, and they began to make up more than 5 percent of either chamber only in the 1990s.
Many advances in women’s rights have been the result of women’s greater engagement in politics and representation in the halls of government, especially since the founding of the National Organization for Women in 1966 and the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) in 1971. The NWPC was formed by Bella Abzug ( Figure 11.11 ), Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, and other leading feminists to encourage women’s participation in political parties, elect women to office, and raise money for their campaigns. For example, Patsy Mink (D-HI) ( Figure 11.11 ), the first Asian American woman elected to Congress, was the coauthor of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Title IX of which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Mink had been interested in fighting discrimination in education since her youth, when she opposed racial segregation in campus housing while a student at the University of Nebraska. She went to law school after being denied admission to medical school because of her gender. Like Mink, many other women sought and won political office, many with the help of the NWPC. Today, EMILY’s List, a PAC founded in 1985 to help elect pro-choice Democratic women to office, plays a major role in fundraising for female candidates. In the 2018 midterm elections, thirty-four women endorsed by EMILY’s List won election to the U.S. House. 28 In 2020, the Republicans took a page from the Democrats’ playbook when they made the recruitment and support of quality female candidates a priority and increased the number of Republican women in the House from thirteen to twenty-eight, including ten seats formerly held by Democrats. 29
REPRESENTING CONSTITUENTS
Ethnic, racial, gender, or ideological identity aside, it is a representative’s actions in Congress that ultimately reflect their understanding of representation. Congress members’ most important function as lawmakers is writing, supporting, and passing bills. And as representatives of their constituents, they are charged with addressing those constituents’ interests. Historically, this job has included what some have affectionately called “bringing home the bacon” but what many (usually those outside the district in question) call pork-barrel politics . As a term and a practice, pork-barrel politics —federal spending on projects designed to benefit a particular district or set of constituents—has been around since the nineteenth century, when barrels of salt pork were both a sign of wealth and a system of reward. While pork-barrel politics are often deplored during election campaigns, and earmarks—funds appropriated for specific projects—are no longer permitted in Congress (see feature box below), legislative control of local appropriations nevertheless still exists. In more formal language, allocation , or the influencing of the national budget in ways that help the district or state, can mean securing funds for a specific district’s project like an airport, or getting tax breaks for certain types of agriculture or manufacturing.
Such budgetary allocations aren’t always looked upon favorably by constituents. Consider, for example, the passage of the ACA in 2010. The desire for comprehensive universal health care had been a driving position of the Democrats since at least the 1960s. During the 2008 campaign, that desire was so great among both Democrats and Republicans that both parties put forth plans. When the Democrats took control of Congress and the presidency in 2009, they quickly began putting together their plan. Soon, however, the politics grew complex, and the proposed plan became very contentious for the Republican Party.
Nevertheless, the desire to make good on a decades-old political promise compelled Democrats to do everything in their power to pass something. They offered sympathetic members of the Republican Party valuable budgetary concessions; they attempted to include allocations they hoped the opposition might feel compelled to support; and they drafted the bill in a purposely complex manner to avoid future challenges. These efforts, however, had the opposite effect. The Republican Party’s constituency interpreted the allocations as bribery and the bill as inherently flawed, and felt it should be scrapped entirely. The more Democrats dug in, the more frustrated the Republicans became ( Figure 11.14 ).
Historically, representatives have been able to balance their role as members of a national legislative body with their role as representatives of a smaller community. The Obamacare fight, however, gave a boost to the growing concern that the power structure in Washington divides representatives from the needs of their constituency. 32 This has exerted pressure on representatives to the extent that some now pursue a more straightforward delegate approach to representation. Indeed, following the 2010 election, a handful of Republicans began living in their offices in Washington, convinced that by not establishing a residence in Washington, they would appear closer to their constituents at home. 33
COLLECTIVE REPRESENTATION AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL
The concept of collective representation describes the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole. That is, it considers whether the institution itself represents the American people, not just whether a particular member of Congress represents their district. Predictably, it is far more difficult for Congress to maintain a level of collective representation than it is for individual members of Congress to represent their own constituents. Not only is Congress a mixture of different ideologies, interests, and party affiliations, but the collective constituency of the United States has an even-greater level of diversity. Nor is it a solution to attempt to match the diversity of opinions and interests in the United States with those in Congress. Indeed, such an attempt would likely make it more difficult for Congress to maintain collective representation. Its rules and procedures require Congress to use flexibility, bargaining, and concessions. Yet, it is this flexibility and these concessions, which many now interpret as corruption, that tend to engender the high public disapproval ratings experienced by Congress.
After many years of deadlocks and bickering on Capitol Hill, the national perception of Congress has tended to run under 20 percent approval in recent years, with large majorities disapproving. Through mid-2021, the Congress, narrowly under Democratic control, was receiving higher approval ratings, above 30 percent. However, congressional approval still lags public approval of the presidency and Supreme Court by a considerable margin. In the two decades following the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s, the national approval rating of Congress hovered between 30 and 40 percent, then trended upward in the 1990s, before trending downward in the twenty-first century. 34
Yet, incumbent reelections have remained largely unaffected. The reason has to do with the remarkable ability of many in the United States to separate their distaste for Congress from their appreciation for their own representative. Paradoxically, this tendency to hate the group but love one’s own representative actually perpetuates the problem of poor congressional approval ratings. The reason is that it blunts voters’ natural desire to replace those in power who are earning such low approval ratings.
As decades of polling indicate, few events push congressional approval ratings above 50 percent. Indeed, when the ratings are graphed, the two noticeable peaks are at 57 percent in 1998 and 84 percent in 2001 ( Figure 11.15 ). In 1998, according to Gallup polling, the rise in approval accompanied a similar rise in other mood measures, including President Bill Clinton ’s approval ratings and general satisfaction with the state of the country and the economy. In 2001, approval spiked after the September 11 terrorist attacks and the Bush administration launched the “War on Terror,” sending troops first to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. War has the power to bring majorities of voters to view their Congress and president in an overwhelmingly positive way. 35
One of the events that began the approval rating’s downward trend was Congress’s divisive debate over national deficits. A deficit is what results when Congress spends more than it has available. It then conducts additional deficit spending by increasing the national debt. Many modern economists contend that during periods of economic decline, the nation should run deficits, because additional government spending has a stimulative effect that can help restart a sluggish economy. Despite this benefit, voters rarely appreciate deficits. They see Congress as spending wastefully during a time when they themselves are cutting costs to get by.
The disconnect between the common public perception of running a deficit and its legitimate policy goals is frequently exploited for political advantage. For example, while running for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama slammed the deficit spending of the George W. Bush presidency, saying it was “unpatriotic.” This sentiment echoed complaints Democrats had been issuing for years as a weapon against President Bush’s policies. Following the election of President Obama and the Democratic takeover of the Senate, the concern over deficit spending shifted parties, with Republicans championing a spendthrift policy as a way of resisting Democratic policies.
American Government and Politics Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
Share This Book
Congressional Representation
Lumen Learning and OpenStax
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Explain the basics of representation
- Describe the extent to which Congress as a body represents the U.S. population
- Explain the concept of collective representation
- Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings
The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office. In this section, we will explore three different models of representation and the concept of descriptive representation. We will look at the way members of Congress navigate the challenging terrain of representation as they serve and all the many predictable and unpredictable consequences of the decisions they make.
TYPES OF REPRESENTATION: LOOKING OUT FOR CONSTITUENTS
By definition and title, senators and House members are representatives. This means they are intended to be drawn from local populations around the country so they can speak for and make decisions for those local populations, their constituents, while serving in their respective legislative houses. That is, representation refers to an elected leader looking out for his or her constituents while carrying out the duties of the office. [1]
Theoretically, the process of constituents voting regularly and reaching out to their representatives helps these congresspersons better represent them. It is considered a given by some in representative democracies that representatives will seldom ignore the wishes of constituents, especially on salient issues that directly affect the district or state. In reality, the job of representing in Congress is often quite complicated, and elected leaders do not always know where their constituents stand. Nor do constituents always agree on everything. Navigating their sometimes contradictory demands and balancing them with the demands of the party, powerful interest groups, ideological concerns, the legislative body, their own personal beliefs, and the country as a whole can be a complicated and frustrating process for representatives.
Traditionally, representatives have seen their roles as that of delegates, trustees, or people attempting to balance the two. A representative who sees themselves as a delegate believes they are empowered merely to enact the wishes of constituents. Delegates must employ some means to identify the views of their constituents and then vote accordingly. They are not permitted the liberty of employing their own reason and judgment while acting as representatives in Congress. This is the delegate model of representation .
In contrast, a representative who understands their role to be that of a trustee believes they are entrusted by the constituents with the power to use good judgment to make decisions on the constituents’ behalf. In the words of the eighteenth-century British philosopher Edmund Burke, who championed the trustee model of representation , “Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests . . . [it is rather] a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole.” [2] In the modern setting, trustee representatives will look to party consensus, party leadership, powerful interests, the member’s own personal views, and national trends to better identify the voting choices they should make.
Understandably, few if any representatives adhere strictly to one model or the other. Instead, most find themselves attempting to balance the important principles embedded in each. Political scientists call this the politico model of representation . In it, a member of Congress acts as either trustee or delegate based on rational political calculations about who is best served, the constituency or the nation.
For example, every representative, regardless of party or conservative versus liberal leanings, must remain firm in support of some ideologies and resistant to others. On the political right, an issue that demands support might be gun rights; on the left, it might be a woman’s right to an abortion. For votes related to such issues, representatives will likely pursue a delegate approach. For other issues, especially complex questions the public at large has little patience for, such as subtle economic reforms, representatives will tend to follow a trustee approach. This is not to say their decisions on these issues run contrary to public opinion. Rather, it merely means they are not acutely aware of or cannot adequately measure the extent to which their constituents support or reject the proposals at hand. It could also mean that the issue is not salient to their constituents. Congress works on hundreds of different issues each year, and constituents are likely not aware of the particulars of most of them.
DESCRIPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS
In some cases, representation can seem to have very little to do with the substantive issues representatives in Congress tend to debate. Instead, proper representation for some is rooted in the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and sexual identity of the representatives themselves. This form of representation is called descriptive representation .
At one time, there was relatively little concern about descriptive representation in Congress. A major reason is that until well into the twentieth century, White men of European background constituted an overwhelming majority of the voting population. African Americans were routinely deprived of the opportunity to participate in democracy, and Hispanics and other minority groups were fairly insignificant in number and excluded by the states. While women in many western states could vote sooner, all women were not able to exercise their right to vote nationwide until passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920, and they began to make up more than 5 percent of either chamber only in the 1990s.
Many advances in women’s rights have been the result of women’s greater engagement in politics and representation in the halls of government, especially since the founding of the National Organization for Women in 1966 and the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) in 1971. The NWPC was formed by Bella Abzug, Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, and other leading feminists to encourage women’s participation in political parties, elect women to office, and raise money for their campaigns. For example, Patsy Mink (D-HI), the first Asian American woman elected to Congress, was the coauthor of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Mink had been interested in fighting discrimination in education since her youth, when she opposed racial segregation in campus housing while a student at the University of Nebraska. She went to law school after being denied admission to medical school because of her gender. Like Mink, many other women sought and won political office, many with the help of the NWPC. Today, EMILY’s List, a PAC founded in 1985 to help elect pro-choice Democratic women to office, plays a major role in fundraising for female candidates. In the 2018 midterm elections, thirty-four women endorsed by EMILY’s List won election to the U.S. House. [3] In 2020, the Republicans took a page from the Democrats’ playbook when they made the recruitment and support of quality female candidates a priority and increased the number of Republican women in the House from thirteen to twenty-eight, including ten seats formerly held by Democrats. [4]
In the wake of the civil rights movement, African American representatives also began to enter Congress in increasing numbers. In 1971, to better represent their interests, these representatives founded the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), an organization that grew out of a Democratic select committee formed in 1969. Founding members of the CBC include Ralph Metcalfe (D-IL), a former sprinter from Chicago who had medaled at both the Los Angeles (1932) and Berlin (1936) Olympic Games, and Shirley Chisholm, a founder of the NWPC and the first African American woman to be elected to the House of Representatives.
In recent decades, Congress has become much more descriptively representative of the United States. The 117th Congress, which began in January 2021, had a historically large percentage of racial and ethnic minorities. African Americans made up the largest percentage, with sixty-two members (including two delegates and two people who would soon resign to serve in the executive branch), while Latinos accounted for fifty-four members (including two delegates and the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico), up from thirty just a decade before. [5] Yet, demographically speaking, Congress as a whole is still a long way from where the country is and is composed of largely White wealthy men. For example, although more than half the U.S. population is female, only 25 percent of Congress is. Congress is also overwhelmingly Christian.
REPRESENTING CONSTITUENTS
Ethnic, racial, gender, or ideological identity aside, it is a representative’s actions in Congress that ultimately reflect his or her understanding of representation. Congress members’ most important function as lawmakers is writing, supporting, and passing bills. And as representatives of their constituents, they are charged with addressing those constituents’ interests. Historically, this job has included what some have affectionately called “bringing home the bacon” but what many (usually those outside the district in question) call pork-barrel politics . As a term and a practice, pork-barrel politics—federal spending on projects designed to benefit a particular district or set of constituents—has been around since the nineteenth century, when barrels of salt pork were both a sign of wealth and a system of reward. While pork-barrel politics are often deplored during election campaigns, and earmarks—funds appropriated for specific projects—are no longer permitted in Congress (see feature box below), legislative control of local appropriations nevertheless still exists. In more formal language, allocation , or the influencing of the national budget in ways that help the district or state, can mean securing funds for a specific district’s project like an airport, or getting tax breaks for certain types of agriculture or manufacturing.
GET CONNECTED!
Language and Metaphor
The language and metaphors of war and violence are common in politics. Candidates routinely “smell blood in the water,” “battle for delegates,” go “head-to-head,” and “make heads roll.” But references to actual violence aren’t the only metaphorical devices commonly used in politics. Another is mentions of food. Powerful speakers frequently “throw red meat to the crowds;” careful politicians prefer to stick to “meat-and-potato issues;” and representatives are frequently encouraged by their constituents to “bring home the bacon.” And the way members of Congress typically “bring home the bacon” is often described with another agricultural metaphor, the “earmark.”
In ranching, an earmark is a small cut on the ear of a cow or other animal to denote ownership. Similarly, in Congress, an earmark is a mark in a bill that directs some of the bill’s funds to be spent on specific projects or for specific tax exemptions. Since the 1980s, the earmark has become a common vehicle for sending money to various projects around the country. Many a road, hospital, and airport can trace its origins back to a few skillfully drafted earmarks.
Relatively few people outside Congress had ever heard of the term before the 2008 presidential election, when Republican nominee Senator John McCain touted his career-long refusal to use the earmark as a testament to his commitment to reforming spending habits in Washington. [6] McCain’s criticism of the earmark as a form of corruption cast a shadow over a previously common legislative practice. As the country sank into recession and Congress tried to use spending bills to stimulate the economy, the public grew more acutely aware of its earmarking habits. Congresspersons then were eager to distance themselves from the practice. In fact, the use of earmarks to encourage Republicans to help pass health care reform actually made the bill less popular with the public.
In 2011, after Republicans took over the House, they outlawed earmarks. But with deadlocks and stalemates becoming more common, some quiet voices have begun asking for a return to the practice. They argue that Congress works because representatives can satisfy their responsibilities to their constituents by making deals. The earmarks are those deals. By taking them away, Congress has hampered its own ability to “bring home the bacon.”
Are earmarks a vital part of legislating or a corrupt practice that was rightly jettisoned? Pick a cause or industry, and investigate whether any earmarks ever favored it, or research the way earmarks have hurt or helped your state or district and decide for yourself.
Follow-up activity: Find out where your congressional representative stands on the ban on earmarks and write to support or dissuade him or her.
Such budgetary allocations aren’t always looked upon favorably by constituents. Consider, for example, the passage of the ACA in 2010. The desire for comprehensive universal health care had been a driving position of the Democrats since at least the 1960s. During the 2008 campaign, that desire was so great among both Democrats and Republicans that both parties put forth plans. When the Democrats took control of Congress and the presidency in 2009, they quickly began putting together their plan. Soon, however, the politics grew complex, and the proposed plan became very contentious for the Republican Party.
Nevertheless, the desire to make good on a decades-old political promise compelled Democrats to do everything in their power to pass something. They offered sympathetic members of the Republican Party valuable budgetary concessions; they attempted to include allocations they hoped the opposition might feel compelled to support; and they drafted the bill in a purposely complex manner to avoid future challenges. These efforts, however, had the opposite effect. The Republican Party’s constituency interpreted the allocations as bribery and the bill as inherently flawed and felt it should be scrapped entirely. The more Democrats dug in, the more frustrated the Republicans became.
The Republican opposition, which took control of the House during the 2010 midterm elections, promised constituents they would repeal the law. Their attempts were complicated, however, by the fact that Democrats still held the Senate and the presidency. Yet, the desire to represent the interests of their constituents compelled Republicans to use another tool at their disposal, the symbolic vote. During the 112th and 113th Congresses, Republicans voted more than sixty times to either repeal or severely limit the reach of the law. They understood these efforts had little to no chance of ever making it to the president’s desk. And if they did, he would certainly have vetoed them. But it was important for these representatives to demonstrate to their constituents that they understood their wishes and were willing to act on them.
Historically, representatives have been able to balance their role as members of a national legislative body with their role as representatives of a smaller community. The Obamacare fight, however, gave a boost to the growing concern that the power structure in Washington divides representatives from the needs of their constituency. [7] This has exerted pressure on representatives to the extent that some now pursue a more straightforward delegate approach to representation. Indeed, following the 2010 election, a handful of Republicans began living in their offices in Washington, convinced that by not establishing a residence in Washington, they would appear closer to their constituents at home. [8]
COLLECTIVE REPRESENTATION AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL
The concept of collective representation describes the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole. That is, it considers whether the institution itself represents the American people, not just whether a particular member of Congress represents their district. Predictably, it is far more difficult for Congress to maintain a level of collective representation than it is for individual members of Congress to represent their own constituents. Not only is Congress a mixture of different ideologies, interests, and party affiliations, but the collective constituency of the United States has an even-greater level of diversity. Nor is it a solution to attempt to match the diversity of opinions and interests in the United States with those in Congress. Indeed, such an attempt would likely make it more difficult for Congress to maintain collective representation. Its rules and procedures require Congress to use flexibility, bargaining, and concessions. Yet, it is this flexibility and these concessions, which many now interpret as corruption, that tend to engender the high public disapproval ratings experienced by Congress.
After many years of deadlocks and bickering on Capitol Hill, the national perception of Congress has tended to run under 20 percent approval in recent years, with large majorities disapproving. Through mid-2021, the Congress, narrowly under Democratic control, was receiving higher approval ratings, above 30 percent. However, congressional approval still lags public approval of the presidency and Supreme Court by a considerable margin. In the two decades following the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s, the national approval rating of Congress hovered between 30 and 40 percent, then trended upward in the 1990s, before trending downward in the twenty-first century. [9]
Yet, incumbent reelections have remained largely unaffected. The reason has to do with the remarkable ability of many in the United States to separate their distaste for Congress from their appreciation for their own representative. Paradoxically, this tendency to hate the group but love one’s own representative actually perpetuates the problem of poor congressional approval ratings. The reason is that it blunts voters’ natural desire to replace those in power who are earning such low approval ratings.
As decades of polling indicate, few events push congressional approval ratings above 50 percent. Indeed, when the ratings are graphed, the two noticeable peaks are at 57 percent in 1998 and 84 percent in 2001. In 1998, according to Gallup polling, the rise in approval accompanied a similar rise in other mood measures, including President Bill Clinton’s approval ratings and general satisfaction with the state of the country and the economy. In 2001, approval spiked after the September 11 terrorist attacks and the Bush administration launched the “War on Terror,” sending troops first to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. War has the power to bring majorities of voters to view their Congress and president in an overwhelmingly positive way. [10]
Nevertheless, all things being equal, citizens tend to rate Congress more highly when things get done and more poorly when things do not get done. For example, during the first half of President Obama’s first term, Congress’s approval rating reached a relative high of about 40 percent. Both houses were dominated by members of the president’s own party, and many people were eager for Congress to take action to end the deep recession and begin to repair the economy. Millions were suffering economically, out of work, or losing their jobs, and the idea that Congress was busy passing large stimulus packages, working on finance reform, and grilling unpopular bank CEOs and financial titans appealed to many. Approval began to fade as the Republican Party slowed the wheels of Congress during the tumultuous debates over Obamacare and reached a low of 9 percent following the federal government shutdown in October 2013.
One of the events that began the approval rating’s downward trend was Congress’s divisive debate over national deficits. A deficit is what results when Congress spends more than it has available. It then conducts additional deficit spending by increasing the national debt. Many modern economists contend that during periods of economic decline, the nation should run deficits, because additional government spending has a stimulating effect that can help restart a sluggish economy. Despite this benefit, voters rarely appreciate deficits. They see Congress as spending wastefully during a time when they themselves are cutting costs to get by.
The disconnect between the common public perception of running a deficit and its legitimate policy goals is frequently exploited for political advantage. For example, while running for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama slammed the deficit spending of the George W. Bush presidency, saying it was “unpatriotic.” This sentiment echoed complaints Democrats had been issuing for years as a weapon against President Bush’s policies. Following the election of President Obama and the Democratic takeover of the Senate, the concern over deficit spending shifted parties, with Republicans championing a spendthrift policy as a way of resisting Democratic policies.
LINK TO LEARNING
Find your representative at the U.S. House website and then explore his or her website and social media accounts to see whether the issues on which your representative spends time are the ones you think are most appropriate.
CHAPTER REVIEW
See the Chapter 11.3 Review for a summary of this section, the key vocabulary , and some review questions to check your knowledge.
- Steven S. Smith. 1999. The American Congress. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. ↵
- Edmund Burke, "Speech to the Electors of Bristol," 3 November 1774, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html (May 1, 2016). ↵
- EMILY's List, "Our History," https://www.emilyslist.org/pages/entry/our-history (June 1, 2021). ↵
- Michele L. Swers, "More Republican women than before will serve this Congress. Here's why." Washington Post , 5 January 2021. ↵
- Jennifer E. Manning, August 5, 2021. "Membership of the 117th Congress: A Profile." Congressional Research Service. ( https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46705 ) ↵
- "Statement by John McCain on Banning Earmarks," 13 March 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=90739 (May 15, 2016); "Press Release - John McCain’s Economic Plan," 15 April 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=94082 (May 15, 2016). ↵
- Kathleen Parker, "Health-Care Reform’s Sickeningly Sweet Deals," The Washington Post, 10 March 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/09/AR2010030903068.html (May 1, 2016); Dana Milbank, "Sweeteners for the South," The Washington Post, 22 November 2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102272.html (May 1, 2016); Jeffrey H. Anderson, "Nebraska’s Dark-Horse Candidate and the Cornhusker Kickback," The Weekly Standard, 4 May 2014. ↵
- Phil Hirschkorn and Wyatt Andrews, "One-Fifth of House Freshmen Sleep in Offices," CBS News, 22 January 2011, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/one-fifth-of-house-freshmen-sleep-in-offices/ (May 1, 2016). ↵
- “Congress and the Public,” http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx (May 15, 2016). ↵
- "Congress and the Public," http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx (May 15, 2016). ↵
an elected leader’s looking out for his or her constituents while carrying out the duties of the office
a model of representation in which representatives feel compelled to act on the specific stated wishes of their constituents
a model of representation in which representatives feel at liberty to act in the way they believe is best for their constituents
a model of representation in which members of Congress act as either trustee or delegate, based on rational political calculations about who is best served, the constituency or the nation
the extent to which a body of representatives represents the descriptive characteristics of their constituencies, such as class, race, ethnicity, and gender
federal spending intended to benefit a particular district or set of constituents
the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole, and whether the institution itself represents the American people
Congressional Representation Copyright © 2022 by Lumen Learning and OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
Share This Book
Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .
Login Alert
- > The American Congress
- > Representation and Lawmaking in Congress
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Acknowledgments
- 1 The Troubled Congress
- 2 Representation and Lawmaking in Congress
- 3 Congressional Elections and Policy Alignments
- 4 Members, Goals, Resources, and Strategies
- 5 Parties and Leaders
- 6 The Standing Committees
- 7 The Rules of the Legislative Game
- 8 The Floor and Voting
- 9 Congress and the President
- 10 Congress and the Courts
- 11 Congress, Lobbyists, and Interest Groups
- 12 Congress and Budget Politics
- Appendix Introduction to the Spatial Theory of Legislating
2 - Representation and Lawmaking in Congress
The Constitutional and Historical Context
In representation and lawmaking, rules matter. The constitution creates both a system of representation and a process for making law through two chambers of Congress and a president. One constitutional rule determines the official constituencies of representatives and senators; another determines how members of Congress are elected and how long they serve. Other constitutional rules outline the elements of the legislative process – generally the House, Senate, and president must agree on legislation before it can become law, unless a two-thirds majority of each chamber can override a presidential veto. More detailed rules about the electoral and legislative processes are left for federal statutes, state laws, and internal rules of the House and Senate.
Although the constitutional rules governing representation and lawmaking have changed in only a few ways since Congress first convened in 1789, other features of congressional politics have changed in many ways. The Constitution says nothing about congressional parties and committees, yet most legislation in the modern Congress is written in committees. Committees are appointed through the parties, and party leaders schedule legislation for consideration on the floor. In this chapter, we describe the basic elements of the representation and lawmaking processes and provide an overview of the development of the key components of the modern legislative process.
Access options
Save book to kindle.
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .
- Representation and Lawmaking in Congress
- Steven S. Smith , Washington University, St Louis , Jason M. Roberts , University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill , Ryan J. Vander Wielen , Temple University, Philadelphia
- Book: The American Congress
- Online publication: 05 August 2013
- Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107337749.003
Save book to Dropbox
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .
Save book to Google Drive
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .
Directory of Representatives
Also referred to as a congressman or congresswoman, each representative is elected to a two-year term serving the people of a specific congressional district. The number of voting representatives in the House is fixed by law at no more than 435, proportionally representing the population of the 50 states. Currently, there are five delegates representing the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. A resident commissioner represents Puerto Rico. Learn more about representatives at The House Explained .
Key to Room Codes
- CHOB: Cannon House Office Building
- LHOB: Longworth House Office Building
- RHOB: Rayburn House Office Building
- View the campus map
A Note About Room Numbering
- By State and District
- By Last Name
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1330 LHOB | (202) 225-4931 | Appropriations|Natural Resources | |
2nd | R | 1504 LHOB | (202) 225-2901 | Agriculture|Judiciary | |
3rd | R | 2469 RHOB | (202) 225-3261 | Armed Services | |
4th | R | 266 CHOB | (202) 225-4876 | Appropriations | |
5th | R | 1337 LHOB | (202) 225-4801 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Science, Space, and Technology | |
6th | R | 170 CHOB | (202) 225-4921 | Oversight and Accountability|Energy and Commerce | |
7th | D | 1035 LHOB | (202) 225-2665 | Armed Services|House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library|Ways and Means |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
At Large | D | 153 CHOB | (202) 225-5765 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Delegate | R | 2001 RHOB | (202) 225-8577 | Foreign Affairs|Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 460 CHOB | (202) 225-2190 | Ways and Means | |
2nd | R | 1229 LHOB | (202) 225-3361 | Homeland Security|Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
3rd | D | 1114 LHOB | (202) 225-4065 | Armed Services|Natural Resources | |
4th | D | 207 CHOB | (202) 225-9888 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
5th | R | 252 CHOB | (202) 225-2635 | Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary | |
6th | R | 1429 LHOB | (202) 225-2542 | Appropriations|Veterans' Affairs | |
7th | D | 1203 LHOB | (202) 225-2435 | Education and the Workforce|Natural Resources | |
8th | R | 1214 LHOB | (202) 225-4576 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
9th | R | 2057 RHOB | (202) 225-2315 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 2422 RHOB | (202) 225-4076 | Agriculture|Intelligence|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
2nd | R | 1533 LHOB | (202) 225-2506 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs|Intelligence | |
3rd | R | 2412 RHOB | (202) 225-4301 | Appropriations | |
4th | R | 202 CHOB | (202) 225-3772 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 408 CHOB | (202) 225-3076 | Agriculture|Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
2nd | D | 2445 RHOB | (202) 225-5161 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
3rd | R | 1032 LHOB | (202) 225-2523 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
4th | D | 268 CHOB | (202) 225-3311 | Ways and Means | |
5th | R | 2256 RHOB | (202) 225-2511 | Budget|Natural Resources|Judiciary | |
6th | D | 172 CHOB | (202) 225-5716 | Foreign Affairs|Intelligence|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
7th | D | 2311 RHOB | (202) 225-7163 | Energy and Commerce | |
8th | D | 2004 RHOB | (202) 225-1880 | Armed Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
9th | D | 209 CHOB | (202) 225-4540 | Appropriations | |
10th | D | 503 CHOB | (202) 225-2095 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure|Ethics | |
11th | D | 1236 LHOB | (202) 225-4965 | ||
12th | D | 2470 RHOB | (202) 225-2661 | Appropriations|Budget | |
13th | R | 1535 LHOB | (202) 225-1947 | Agriculture|Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
14th | D | 174 CHOB | (202) 225-5065 | Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
15th | D | 1404 LHOB | (202) 225-3531 | Natural Resources|Science, Space, and Technology | |
16th | D | 272 CHOB | (202) 225-8104 | Energy and Commerce | |
17th | D | 306 CHOB | (202) 225-2631 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
18th | D | 1401 LHOB | (202) 225-3072 | Judiciary|Science, Space, and Technology | |
19th | D | 304 CHOB | (202) 225-2861 | Armed Services|Budget|Ways and Means | |
20th | R | 2468 RHOB | (202) 225-2915 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
21st | D | 2081 RHOB | (202) 225-3341 | Agriculture|Foreign Affairs | |
22nd | R | 2465 RHOB | (202) 225-4695 | Appropriations|Budget|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library | |
23rd | R | 1029 LHOB | (202) 225-5861 | Energy and Commerce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
24th | D | 2331 RHOB | (202) 225-3601 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
25th | D | 2342 RHOB | (202) 225-5330 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
26th | D | 2262 RHOB | (202) 225-5811 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Veterans' Affairs | |
27th | R | 144 CHOB | (202) 225-1956 | Appropriations|Intelligence|Science, Space, and Technology | |
28th | D | 2423 RHOB | (202) 225-5464 | Small Business|Ways and Means | |
29th | D | 2181 RHOB | (202) 225-6131 | Energy and Commerce | |
30th | D | 2309 RHOB | (202) 225-4176 | Judiciary | |
31st | D | 1610 LHOB | (202) 225-5256 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
32nd | D | 2365 RHOB | (202) 225-5911 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
33rd | D | 108 CHOB | (202) 225-3201 | Appropriations | |
34th | D | 506 CHOB | (202) 225-6235 | Intelligence|Ways and Means | |
35th | D | 2227 RHOB | (202) 225-6161 | Appropriations|House Administration | |
36th | D | 2454 RHOB | (202) 225-3976 | Foreign Affairs|Judiciary | |
37th | D | 1419 LHOB | (202) 225-7084 | Foreign Affairs|Natural Resources | |
38th | D | 2428 RHOB | (202) 225-6676 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Ways and Means | |
39th | D | 2078 RHOB | (202) 225-2305 | Education and the Workforce|Veterans' Affairs | |
40th | R | 1306 LHOB | (202) 225-4111 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
41st | R | 2205 RHOB | (202) 225-1986 | Appropriations | |
42nd | D | 1305 LHOB | (202) 225-7924 | Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
43rd | D | 2221 RHOB | (202) 225-2201 | Financial Services | |
44th | D | 2312 RHOB | (202) 225-8220 | Energy and Commerce | |
45th | R | 1127 LHOB | (202) 225-2415 | Education and the Workforce|Ways and Means|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
46th | D | 2301 RHOB | (202) 225-2965 | Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
47th | D | 1233 LHOB | (202) 225-5611 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
48th | R | 2108 RHOB | (202) 225-5672 | Foreign Affairs|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Judiciary|Science, Space, and Technology | |
49th | D | 2352 RHOB | (202) 225-3906 | Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs | |
50th | D | 1201 LHOB | (202) 225-0508 | Budget|Energy and Commerce | |
51st | D | 1314 LHOB | (202) 225-2040 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs | |
52nd | D | 2334 RHOB | (202) 225-8045 | Financial Services |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2111 RHOB | (202) 225-4431 | Energy and Commerce | |
2nd | D | 2400 RHOB | (202) 225-2161 | Natural Resources|Judiciary|Rules | |
3rd | R | 1713 LHOB | (202) 225-4761 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
4th | R | 2455 RHOB | (202) 225-4676 | Budget|Science, Space, and Technology | |
5th | R | 2371 RHOB | (202) 225-4422 | Armed Services|Natural Resources | |
6th | D | 1323 LHOB | (202) 225-7882 | Foreign Affairs|Intelligence | |
7th | D | 1230 LHOB | (202) 225-2645 | Financial Services | |
8th | D | 1024 LHOB | (202) 225-5625 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 1501 LHOB | (202) 225-2265 | Ways and Means | |
2nd | D | 2449 RHOB | (202) 225-2076 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce | |
3rd | D | 2413 RHOB | (202) 225-3661 | Appropriations | |
4th | D | 2137 RHOB | (202) 225-5541 | Financial Services|Intelligence | |
5th | D | 2458 RHOB | (202) 225-4476 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
At Large | D | 1724 LHOB | (202) 225-4165 | Energy and Commerce |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Delegate | D | 2136 RHOB | (202) 225-8050 | Oversight and Accountability|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 2021 RHOB | (202) 225-4136 | Armed Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Judiciary | |
2nd | R | 466 CHOB | (202) 225-5235 | Energy and Commerce|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
3rd | R | 2421 RHOB | (202) 225-5744 | Agriculture|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Energy and Commerce | |
4th | R | 1239 LHOB | (202) 225-0123 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
5th | R | 1711 LHOB | (202) 225-2501 | Appropriations|Ethics | |
6th | R | 244 CHOB | (202) 225-2706 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence | |
7th | R | 1237 LHOB | (202) 225-4035 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs | |
8th | R | 2150 RHOB | (202) 225-3671 | Financial Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
9th | D | 2353 RHOB | (202) 225-9889 | Agriculture|Energy and Commerce | |
10th | D | 1224 LHOB | (202) 225-2176 | Oversight and Accountability|Science, Space, and Technology | |
11th | R | 2184 RHOB | (202) 225-1002 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
12th | R | 2306 RHOB | (202) 225-5755 | Energy and Commerce | |
13th | R | 1017 LHOB | (202) 225-5961 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
14th | D | 2052 RHOB | (202) 225-3376 | Energy and Commerce|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
15th | R | 1118 LHOB | (202) 225-5626 | House Administration|Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
16th | R | 2110 RHOB | (202) 225-5015 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
17th | R | 2457 RHOB | (202) 225-5792 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Ways and Means | |
18th | R | 249 CHOB | (202) 225-1252 | Appropriations|Science, Space, and Technology|Veterans' Affairs | |
19th | R | 1719 LHOB | (202) 225-2536 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
20th | D | 242 CHOB | (202) 225-1313 | Foreign Affairs|Veterans' Affairs | |
21st | R | 2182 RHOB | (202) 225-3026 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
22nd | D | 2305 RHOB | (202) 225-9890 | Appropriations | |
23rd | D | 1130 LHOB | (202) 225-3001 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability | |
24th | D | 2080 RHOB | (202) 225-4506 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
25th | D | 270 CHOB | (202) 225-7931 | Appropriations|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt | |
26th | R | 374 CHOB | (202) 225-4211 | Appropriations | |
27th | R | 2162 RHOB | (202) 225-3931 | Foreign Affairs|Small Business | |
28th | R | 448 CHOB | (202) 225-2778 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 2432 RHOB | (202) 225-5831 | Budget|Energy and Commerce | |
2nd | D | 2407 RHOB | (202) 225-3631 | Agriculture|Appropriations | |
3rd | R | 2239 RHOB | (202) 225-5901 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
4th | D | 2240 RHOB | (202) 225-1605 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
5th | D | 1406 LHOB | (202) 225-3801 | Financial Services | |
6th | R | 1213 LHOB | (202) 225-4272 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Science, Space, and Technology|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
7th | D | 2246 RHOB | (202) 225-4501 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary | |
8th | R | 2185 RHOB | (202) 225-6531 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Intelligence|Rules | |
9th | R | 445 CHOB | (202) 225-9893 | Appropriations | |
10th | R | 1223 LHOB | (202) 225-4101 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
11th | R | 2133 RHOB | (202) 225-2931 | Financial Services|House Administration | |
12th | R | 462 CHOB | (202) 225-2823 | Education and the Workforce|Energy and Commerce | |
13th | D | 468 CHOB | (202) 225-2939 | Agriculture|Financial Services | |
14th | R | 403 CHOB | (202) 225-5211 | Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Delegate | R | 1628 LHOB | (202) 225-1188 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Natural Resources |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2210 RHOB | (202) 225-2726 | Appropriations|Natural Resources | |
2nd | D | 1005 LHOB | (202) 225-4906 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1514 LHOB | (202) 225-6611 | Energy and Commerce|Natural Resources | |
2nd | R | 2084 RHOB | (202) 225-5531 | Appropriations |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 1641 LHOB | (202) 225-4372 | Agriculture|Foreign Affairs | |
2nd | D | 2329 RHOB | (202) 225-0773 | Energy and Commerce | |
3rd | D | 1523 LHOB | (202) 225-5701 | Homeland Security|Veterans' Affairs | |
4th | D | 1519 LHOB | (202) 225-8203 | Transportation and Infrastructure | |
5th | D | 2083 RHOB | (202) 225-4061 | Appropriations | |
6th | D | 2440 RHOB | (202) 225-4561 | Financial Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
7th | D | 2159 RHOB | (202) 225-5006 | Ways and Means | |
8th | D | 2367 RHOB | (202) 225-3711 | Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
9th | D | 2408 RHOB | (202) 225-2111 | Budget|Energy and Commerce | |
10th | D | 300 CHOB | (202) 225-4835 | Foreign Affairs|Ways and Means | |
11th | D | 2366 RHOB | (202) 225-3515 | Financial Services | |
12th | R | 352 CHOB | (202) 225-5661 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Veterans' Affairs | |
13th | D | 1009 LHOB | (202) 225-2371 | Agriculture|Veterans' Affairs | |
14th | D | 1410 LHOB | (202) 225-2976 | Appropriations | |
15th | R | 1740 LHOB | (202) 225-5271 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce | |
16th | R | 1424 LHOB | (202) 225-6201 | Intelligence|Ways and Means|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
17th | D | 1205 LHOB | (202) 225-5905 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 1607 LHOB | (202) 225-2461 | Education and the Workforce|Veterans' Affairs | |
2nd | R | 349 CHOB | (202) 225-3915 | Budget|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
3rd | R | 2418 RHOB | (202) 225-4436 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
4th | R | 2303 RHOB | (202) 225-5037 | Agriculture|Foreign Affairs|Science, Space, and Technology | |
5th | R | 1609 LHOB | (202) 225-2276 | Judiciary | |
6th | R | 404 CHOB | (202) 225-3021 | Energy and Commerce | |
7th | D | 2135 RHOB | (202) 225-4011 | Intelligence|Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
8th | R | 2313 RHOB | (202) 225-4636 | Energy and Commerce | |
9th | R | 1632 LHOB | (202) 225-5315 | Financial Services|Education and the Workforce|Rules |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1034 LHOB | (202) 225-6576 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic|Veterans' Affairs | |
2nd | R | 1717 LHOB | (202) 225-2911 | Appropriations|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
3rd | R | 1232 LHOB | (202) 225-5476 | Agriculture|Financial Services | |
4th | R | 1440 LHOB | (202) 225-4426 | Agriculture|Ways and Means |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 344 CHOB | (202) 225-2715 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
2nd | R | 2441 RHOB | (202) 225-6601 | Appropriations|Oversight and Accountability | |
3rd | D | 2435 RHOB | (202) 225-2865 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
4th | R | 2234 RHOB | (202) 225-6216 | Budget|Education and the Workforce|Ways and Means |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 2410 RHOB | (202) 225-3115 | Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
2nd | R | 2434 RHOB | (202) 225-3501 | Energy and Commerce | |
3rd | D | 1527 LHOB | (202) 225-5401 | Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
4th | R | 2453 RHOB | (202) 225-3465 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure|Rules | |
5th | R | 2406 RHOB | (202) 225-4601 | Appropriations | |
6th | R | 2430 RHOB | (202) 225-4706 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 2049 RHOB | (202) 225-3015 | ||
2nd | D | 442 CHOB | (202) 225-6636 | Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
3rd | R | 572 CHOB | (202) 225-2031 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security | |
4th | R | 568 CHOB | (202) 225-2777 | ||
5th | R | 142 CHOB | (202) 225-8490 | Appropriations|Education and the Workforce | |
6th | R | 2402 RHOB | (202) 225-3901 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2354 RHOB | (202) 225-6116 | Agriculture|Appropriations | |
2nd | D | 1710 LHOB | (202) 225-6306 | Armed Services|Small Business |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1536 LHOB | (202) 225-5311 | Appropriations | |
2nd | D | 2206 RHOB | (202) 225-3061 | Appropriations | |
3rd | D | 2370 RHOB | (202) 225-4016 | Energy and Commerce | |
4th | D | 1529 LHOB | (202) 225-8699 | Homeland Security|Judiciary|Ethics | |
5th | D | 1705 LHOB | (202) 225-4131 | Appropriations | |
6th | D | 2404 RHOB | (202) 225-2721 | Appropriations|Budget | |
7th | D | 2263 RHOB | (202) 225-4741 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
8th | D | 2242 RHOB | (202) 225-5341 | Oversight and Accountability |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 372 CHOB | (202) 225-5601 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
2nd | D | 370 CHOB | (202) 225-6101 | Agriculture|Rules | |
3rd | D | 2439 RHOB | (202) 225-3411 | Energy and Commerce | |
4th | D | 1524 LHOB | (202) 225-5931 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
5th | D | 2368 RHOB | (202) 225-2836 | ||
6th | D | 1126 LHOB | (202) 225-8020 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
7th | D | 402 CHOB | (202) 225-5111 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
8th | D | 2109 RHOB | (202) 225-8273 | Financial Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability | |
9th | D | 2351 RHOB | (202) 225-3111 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 566 CHOB | (202) 225-4735 | Armed Services|Budget|Veterans' Affairs | |
2nd | R | 246 CHOB | (202) 225-3561 | Appropriations|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
3rd | D | 1317 LHOB | (202) 225-3831 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
4th | R | 2232 RHOB | (202) 225-4401 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
5th | R | 2266 RHOB | (202) 225-6276 | Education and the Workforce|Energy and Commerce | |
6th | D | 102 CHOB | (202) 225-4071 | Energy and Commerce|Natural Resources|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
7th | D | 2245 RHOB | (202) 225-4872 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
8th | D | 200 CHOB | (202) 225-3611 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
9th | R | 444 CHOB | (202) 225-2106 | Armed Services|Budget|Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
10th | R | 1319 LHOB | (202) 225-4961 | Foreign Affairs|Energy and Commerce | |
11th | D | 2411 RHOB | (202) 225-8171 | Education and the Workforce|Science, Space, and Technology|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
12th | D | 2438 RHOB | (202) 225-5126 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
13th | D | 1039 LHOB | (202) 225-5802 | Homeland Security|Small Business |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1605 LHOB | (202) 225-2472 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
2nd | D | 2442 RHOB | (202) 225-2271 | Agriculture|Energy and Commerce | |
3rd | D | 2452 RHOB | (202) 225-2871 | Foreign Affairs|Small Business | |
4th | D | 2426 RHOB | (202) 225-6631 | Appropriations | |
5th | D | 1730 LHOB | (202) 225-4755 | Budget|Education and the Workforce | |
6th | R | 464 CHOB | (202) 225-2331 | Financial Services | |
7th | R | 1004 LHOB | (202) 225-2165 | Budget|Rules|Ethics|Ways and Means | |
8th | R | 145 CHOB | (202) 225-6211 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 2243 RHOB | (202) 225-4306 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Intelligence | |
2nd | D | 2466 RHOB | (202) 225-5876 | Homeland Security | |
3rd | R | 450 CHOB | (202) 225-5031 | Appropriations|Homeland Security|Ethics | |
4th | R | 443 CHOB | (202) 225-5772 | Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2463 RHOB | (202) 225-2406 | Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary | |
2nd | R | 2350 RHOB | (202) 225-1621 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
3rd | R | 2230 RHOB | (202) 225-2956 | Financial Services|Small Business|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
4th | R | 1516 LHOB | (202) 225-2876 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Small Business | |
5th | D | 2217 RHOB | (202) 225-4535 | Financial Services | |
6th | R | 1135 LHOB | (202) 225-7041 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
7th | R | 1108 LHOB | (202) 225-6536 | Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
8th | R | 1011 LHOB | (202) 225-4404 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 512 CHOB | (202) 225-5628 | Appropriations|Foreign Affairs | |
2nd | R | 1023 LHOB | (202) 225-3211 | Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 343 CHOB | (202) 225-4806 | Financial Services | |
2nd | R | 2104 RHOB | (202) 225-4155 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
3rd | R | 502 CHOB | (202) 225-6435 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2464 RHOB | (202) 225-5965 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
2nd | R | 104 CHOB | (202) 225-6155 | Appropriations | |
3rd | D | 365 CHOB | (202) 225-3252 | Appropriations|Natural Resources | |
4th | D | 406 CHOB | (202) 225-9894 | Armed Services|Financial Services |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 452 CHOB | (202) 225-5456 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
2nd | D | 2201 RHOB | (202) 225-5206 | Energy and Commerce |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2427 RHOB | (202) 225-6501 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce | |
2nd | R | 2447 RHOB | (202) 225-6572 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
3rd | D | 2444 RHOB | (202) 225-4765 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
4th | R | 2373 RHOB | (202) 225-3765 | Foreign Affairs | |
5th | D | 203 CHOB | (202) 225-4465 | Financial Services|Intelligence | |
6th | D | 2107 RHOB | (202) 225-4671 | Energy and Commerce | |
7th | R | 251 CHOB | (202) 225-5361 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
8th | D | 1007 LHOB | (202) 225-7919 | Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
9th | - Vacancy | D | 2409 RHOB | (202) 225-5751 | |
10th | - Vacancy | D | 106 CHOB | (202) 225-3436 | |
11th | D | 1427 LHOB | (202) 225-5034 | Armed Services|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
12th | D | 168 CHOB | (202) 225-5801 | Appropriations |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 1421 LHOB | (202) 225-6316 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
2nd | D | 1517 LHOB | (202) 225-2365 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
3rd | D | 1510 LHOB | (202) 225-6190 | Education and the Workforce|Natural Resources|Rules |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1530 LHOB | (202) 225-3826 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Small Business | |
2nd | R | 2344 RHOB | (202) 225-7896 | Financial Services|Homeland Security|Ethics | |
3rd | D | 1117 LHOB | (202) 225-3335 | Budget|Homeland Security | |
4th | R | 1508 LHOB | (202) 225-5516 | House Administration|Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
5th | D | 2310 RHOB | (202) 225-3461 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
6th | D | 2209 RHOB | (202) 225-2601 | Appropriations | |
7th | D | 2302 RHOB | (202) 225-2361 | Financial Services|Natural Resources|Small Business | |
8th | D | 2433 RHOB | (202) 225-5936 | ||
9th | D | 2058 RHOB | (202) 225-6231 | Homeland Security|Energy and Commerce | |
10th | D | 245 CHOB | (202) 225-7944 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security | |
11th | R | 351 CHOB | (202) 225-3371 | Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic|Ways and Means | |
12th | D | 2132 RHOB | (202) 225-5635 | Judiciary | |
13th | D | 2332 RHOB | (202) 225-4365 | Appropriations|Budget | |
14th | D | 250 CHOB | (202) 225-3965 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
15th | D | 1414 LHOB | (202) 225-4361 | Financial Services|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
16th | D | 345 CHOB | (202) 225-2464 | Education and the Workforce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
17th | R | 1013 LHOB | (202) 225-6506 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
18th | D | 1030 LHOB | (202) 225-5614 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
19th | R | 1207 LHOB | (202) 225-5441 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
20th | D | 2369 RHOB | (202) 225-5076 | Energy and Commerce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
21st | R | 2211 RHOB | (202) 225-4611 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Intelligence | |
22nd | R | 1022 LHOB | (202) 225-3701 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
23rd | R | 1630 LHOB | (202) 225-3161 | Agriculture|Oversight and Accountability|Rules | |
24th | R | 2349 RHOB | (202) 225-3665 | Science, Space, and Technology|Ways and Means | |
25th | D | 570 CHOB | (202) 225-3615 | Appropriations|House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library | |
26th | D | 2269 RHOB | (202) 225-3306 | Homeland Security|Veterans' Affairs |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 1123 LHOB | (202) 225-3101 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
2nd | D | 1221 LHOB | (202) 225-3032 | Judiciary|Ethics|Science, Space, and Technology|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
3rd | R | 407 CHOB | (202) 225-3415 | House Administration|Veterans' Affairs|Ways and Means | |
4th | D | 1716 LHOB | (202) 225-1784 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
5th | R | 2462 RHOB | (202) 225-2071 | Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
6th | D | 307 CHOB | (202) 225-3065 | Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs | |
7th | R | 2333 RHOB | (202) 225-2731 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
8th | R | 2459 RHOB | (202) 225-1976 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
9th | R | 2112 RHOB | (202) 225-3715 | Energy and Commerce | |
10th | R | 2134 RHOB | (202) 225-2576 | Financial Services | |
11th | R | 1505 LHOB | (202) 225-6401 | Appropriations|Budget | |
12th | D | 2436 RHOB | (202) 225-1510 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce | |
13th | D | 1133 LHOB | (202) 225-4531 | Financial Services | |
14th | D | 1318 LHOB | (202) 225-5634 | Armed Services|Science, Space, and Technology |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
At Large | R | 2235 RHOB | (202) 225-2611 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Energy and Commerce|Judiciary |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Delegate | D | 2267 RHOB | (202) 225-2646 | Education and the Workforce|Natural Resources |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 1432 LHOB | (202) 225-2216 | Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
2nd | R | 2335 RHOB | (202) 225-3164 | Intelligence|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic|Ways and Means | |
3rd | D | 2079 RHOB | (202) 225-4324 | Financial Services | |
4th | R | 2056 RHOB | (202) 225-2676 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary | |
5th | R | 2467 RHOB | (202) 225-6405 | Energy and Commerce | |
6th | R | 2082 RHOB | (202) 225-5705 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary | |
7th | R | 143 CHOB | (202) 225-3876 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology | |
8th | R | 2113 RHOB | (202) 225-6205 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt | |
9th | D | 2186 RHOB | (202) 225-4146 | Appropriations | |
10th | R | 2183 RHOB | (202) 225-6465 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence | |
11th | D | 449 CHOB | (202) 225-7032 | Agriculture|Oversight and Accountability|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
12th | R | 2429 RHOB | (202) 225-5355 | Energy and Commerce | |
13th | D | 1217 LHOB | (202) 225-6265 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
14th | R | 2065 RHOB | (202) 225-5731 | Appropriations|Ethics | |
15th | R | 1433 LHOB | (202) 225-2015 | House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library|Ways and Means |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1019 LHOB | (202) 225-2211 | Ways and Means | |
2nd | R | 1208 LHOB | (202) 225-2701 | Budget|Homeland Security | |
3rd | R | 2405 RHOB | (202) 225-5565 | Agriculture|Financial Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
4th | R | 2207 RHOB | (202) 225-6165 | Appropriations | |
5th | R | 2437 RHOB | (202) 225-2132 | Appropriations|House Administration|Science, Space, and Technology |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2231 RHOB | (202) 225-0855 | Education and the Workforce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
2nd | R | 409 CHOB | (202) 225-6730 | Natural Resources|Judiciary | |
3rd | D | 1111 LHOB | (202) 225-4811 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
4th | D | 1620 LHOB | (202) 225-6416 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
5th | R | 1722 LHOB | (202) 225-5711 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
6th | D | 109 CHOB | (202) 225-5643 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 271 CHOB | (202) 225-4276 | Intelligence|Ways and Means | |
2nd | D | 1502 LHOB | (202) 225-6111 | Budget | |
3rd | D | 1105 LHOB | (202) 225-4001 | Ways and Means | |
4th | D | 150 CHOB | (202) 225-4731 | Foreign Affairs|Judiciary | |
5th | D | 1227 LHOB | (202) 225-2011 | Judiciary|Rules | |
6th | D | 1727 LHOB | (202) 225-4315 | Armed Services|Intelligence | |
7th | D | 1027 LHOB | (202) 225-6411 | Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs|Ethics | |
8th | D | 2102 RHOB | (202) 225-5546 | Appropriations | |
9th | R | 350 CHOB | (202) 225-6511 | Financial Services|Small Business | |
10th | R | 2160 RHOB | (202) 225-5836 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
11th | R | 302 CHOB | (202) 225-2411 | Budget|Education and the Workforce|Ways and Means | |
12th | D | 243 CHOB | (202) 225-2135 | Oversight and Accountability|Science, Space, and Technology | |
13th | R | 152 CHOB | (202) 225-2431 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
14th | R | 342 CHOB | (202) 225-2065 | Appropriations|Rules | |
15th | R | 400 CHOB | (202) 225-5121 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce | |
16th | R | 1707 LHOB | (202) 225-5406 | Ways and Means | |
17th | D | 1222 LHOB | (202) 225-2301 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Resident Commissioner | R | 2338 RHOB | (202) 225-2615 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2233 RHOB | (202) 225-4911 | Foreign Affairs|Science, Space, and Technology | |
2nd | D | 1218 LHOB | (202) 225-2735 | Homeland Security|Natural Resources |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1728 LHOB | (202) 225-3176 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Veterans' Affairs | |
2nd | R | 1436 LHOB | (202) 225-2452 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs | |
3rd | R | 2229 RHOB | (202) 225-5301 | Energy and Commerce | |
4th | R | 267 CHOB | (202) 225-6030 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
5th | R | 569 CHOB | (202) 225-5501 | Financial Services|Budget|Rules | |
6th | D | 274 CHOB | (202) 225-3315 | ||
7th | R | 1626 LHOB | (202) 225-9895 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
At Large | R | 1714 LHOB | (202) 225-2801 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 167 CHOB | (202) 225-6356 | Energy and Commerce | |
2nd | R | 1122 LHOB | (202) 225-5435 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
3rd | R | 2187 RHOB | (202) 225-3271 | Appropriations|Science, Space, and Technology | |
4th | R | 2304 RHOB | (202) 225-6831 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
5th | R | 151 CHOB | (202) 225-4311 | Financial Services | |
6th | R | 2238 RHOB | (202) 225-4231 | Agriculture|Financial Services | |
7th | R | 2446 RHOB | (202) 225-2811 | Foreign Affairs|Homeland Security | |
8th | R | 560 CHOB | (202) 225-4714 | Ways and Means | |
9th | D | 2268 RHOB | (202) 225-3265 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1541 LHOB | (202) 225-3035 | Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs|Judiciary | |
2nd | R | 248 CHOB | (202) 225-6565 | Energy and Commerce|Intelligence | |
3rd | R | 1113 LHOB | (202) 225-4201 | Foreign Affairs|Veterans' Affairs | |
4th | R | 2416 RHOB | (202) 225-6673 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
5th | R | 2431 RHOB | (202) 225-3484 | Armed Services|Judiciary | |
6th | R | 1721 LHOB | (202) 225-2002 | Appropriations|Small Business | |
7th | D | 346 CHOB | (202) 225-2571 | Energy and Commerce | |
8th | R | 1320 LHOB | (202) 225-4901 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Veterans' Affairs | |
9th | D | 2347 RHOB | (202) 225-7508 | Financial Services | |
10th | R | 2300 RHOB | (202) 225-2401 | Foreign Affairs|Homeland Security | |
11th | R | 1124 LHOB | (202) 225-3605 | Homeland Security|Energy and Commerce | |
12th | R | 2308 RHOB | (202) 225-5071 | Appropriations | |
13th | R | 446 CHOB | (202) 225-3706 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Intelligence|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
14th | R | 107 CHOB | (202) 225-2831 | Energy and Commerce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
15th | R | 1415 LHOB | (202) 225-9901 | Agriculture|Financial Services | |
16th | D | 2448 RHOB | (202) 225-4831 | Armed Services|Judiciary|Ethics | |
17th | R | 2204 RHOB | (202) 225-6105 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
18th | - Vacancy | D | 2314 RHOB | (202) 225-3816 | |
19th | R | 1107 LHOB | (202) 225-4005 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
20th | D | 2241 RHOB | (202) 225-3236 | Foreign Affairs|Intelligence | |
21st | R | 103 CHOB | (202) 225-4236 | Budget|Judiciary|Rules | |
22nd | R | 1104 LHOB | (202) 225-5951 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
23rd | R | 2244 RHOB | (202) 225-4511 | Appropriations|Homeland Security | |
24th | R | 1725 LHOB | (202) 225-6605 | Small Business|Ways and Means | |
25th | R | 2336 RHOB | (202) 225-9896 | Financial Services|Small Business | |
26th | R | 2161 RHOB | (202) 225-7772 | Budget|Energy and Commerce|Rules | |
27th | R | 171 CHOB | (202) 225-7742 | Appropriations|Oversight and Accountability|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
28th | D | 2372 RHOB | (202) 225-1640 | Appropriations | |
29th | D | 2419 RHOB | (202) 225-1688 | Financial Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt | |
30th | D | 1616 LHOB | (202) 225-8885 | Agriculture|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability | |
31st | R | 2208 RHOB | (202) 225-3864 | Appropriations | |
32nd | D | 348 CHOB | (202) 225-2231 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
33rd | D | 2348 RHOB | (202) 225-9897 | Armed Services|Energy and Commerce | |
34th | D | 154 CHOB | (202) 225-2531 | Financial Services | |
35th | D | 1339 LHOB | (202) 225-5645 | Agriculture|Oversight and Accountability | |
36th | R | 2236 RHOB | (202) 225-1555 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
37th | D | 2307 RHOB | (202) 225-4865 | Budget|Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
38th | R | 1520 LHOB | (202) 225-5646 | Natural Resources|Judiciary|Small Business |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1131 LHOB | (202) 225-0453 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
2nd | R | 166 CHOB | (202) 225-9730 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
3rd | R | 2323 RHOB | (202) 225-7751 | Energy and Commerce|Natural Resources | |
4th | R | 309 CHOB | (202) 225-3011 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
At Large | D | 1408 LHOB | (202) 225-4115 | Budget|Judiciary |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 2055 RHOB | (202) 225-4261 | Armed Services|Natural Resources|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
2nd | R | 1037 LHOB | (202) 225-4215 | Armed Services|Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs | |
3rd | D | 2328 RHOB | (202) 225-8351 | Budget|Education and the Workforce | |
4th | D | 2417 RHOB | (202) 225-6365 | Armed Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
5th | R | 461 CHOB | (202) 225-4711 | Budget|Education and the Workforce | |
6th | R | 2443 RHOB | (202) 225-5431 | Appropriations|Budget|Judiciary|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
7th | D | 562 CHOB | (202) 225-2815 | Agriculture|Intelligence | |
8th | D | 1119 LHOB | (202) 225-4376 | Ways and Means | |
9th | R | 2202 RHOB | (202) 225-3861 | House Administration|Energy and Commerce | |
10th | D | 1210 LHOB | (202) 225-5136 | Appropriations|Budget | |
11th | D | 2265 RHOB | (202) 225-1492 | Foreign Affairs|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Delegate | D | 2059 RHOB | (202) 225-1790 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Intelligence |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | D | 2330 RHOB | (202) 225-6311 | Ways and Means | |
2nd | D | 2163 RHOB | (202) 225-2605 | Transportation and Infrastructure | |
3rd | D | 1431 LHOB | (202) 225-3536 | Agriculture|Small Business | |
4th | R | 504 CHOB | (202) 225-5816 | Appropriations|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
5th | R | 2188 RHOB | (202) 225-2006 | Energy and Commerce | |
6th | D | 1226 LHOB | (202) 225-5916 | Appropriations|House Administration | |
7th | D | 2346 RHOB | (202) 225-3106 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary | |
8th | D | 1110 LHOB | (202) 225-7761 | Energy and Commerce | |
9th | D | 2264 RHOB | (202) 225-8901 | Armed Services | |
10th | D | 1708 LHOB | (202) 225-9740 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 465 CHOB | (202) 225-3452 | Ways and Means | |
2nd | R | 2228 RHOB | (202) 225-2711 | Financial Services |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | R | 1526 LHOB | (202) 225-3031 | Financial Services|House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library | |
2nd | D | 1026 LHOB | (202) 225-2906 | Appropriations | |
3rd | R | 1513 LHOB | (202) 225-5506 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Veterans' Affairs | |
4th | D | 2252 RHOB | (202) 225-4572 | Ways and Means | |
5th | R | 1507 LHOB | (202) 225-5101 | Financial Services|Judiciary | |
6th | R | 1511 LHOB | (202) 225-2476 | Budget|Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
7th | R | 451 CHOB | (202) 225-3365 | Natural Resources|Judiciary | |
8th | - Vacancy | R | 1211 LHOB | (202) 225-5665 |
District | Name | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
At Large | R | 1531 LHOB | (202) 225-2311 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Natural Resources|Judiciary |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
North Carolina 12th | D | 2436 RHOB | (202) 225-1510 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce | |
Alabama 4th | R | 266 CHOB | (202) 225-4876 | Appropriations | |
California 33rd | D | 108 CHOB | (202) 225-3201 | Appropriations | |
Missouri 4th | R | 1516 LHOB | (202) 225-2876 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Small Business | |
Georgia 12th | R | 462 CHOB | (202) 225-2823 | Education and the Workforce|Energy and Commerce | |
Texas 32nd | D | 348 CHOB | (202) 225-2231 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Rhode Island 1st | D | 2233 RHOB | (202) 225-4911 | Foreign Affairs|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Nevada 2nd | R | 104 CHOB | (202) 225-6155 | Appropriations | |
North Dakota At Large | R | 2235 RHOB | (202) 225-2611 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Energy and Commerce|Judiciary | |
Texas 19th | R | 1107 LHOB | (202) 225-4005 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
Massachusetts 4th | D | 1524 LHOB | (202) 225-5931 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Texas 36th | R | 2236 RHOB | (202) 225-1555 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Nebraska 2nd | R | 2104 RHOB | (202) 225-4155 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
Indiana 4th | R | 2303 RHOB | (202) 225-5037 | Agriculture|Foreign Affairs|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Ohio 12th | R | 2429 RHOB | (202) 225-5355 | Energy and Commerce | |
Vermont At Large | D | 1408 LHOB | (202) 225-4115 | Budget|Judiciary | |
Indiana 3rd | R | 2418 RHOB | (202) 225-4436 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Kentucky 6th | R | 2430 RHOB | (202) 225-4706 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
California 44th | D | 2312 RHOB | (202) 225-8220 | Energy and Commerce | |
Florida 4th | R | 1239 LHOB | (202) 225-0123 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
Ohio 3rd | D | 2079 RHOB | (202) 225-4324 | Financial Services | |
Oregon 2nd | R | 409 CHOB | (202) 225-6730 | Natural Resources|Judiciary | |
California 6th | D | 172 CHOB | (202) 225-5716 | Foreign Affairs|Intelligence|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
Michigan 1st | R | 566 CHOB | (202) 225-4735 | Armed Services|Budget|Veterans' Affairs | |
Virginia 8th | D | 1119 LHOB | (202) 225-4376 | Ways and Means | |
Oklahoma 5th | R | 2437 RHOB | (202) 225-2132 | Appropriations|House Administration|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Arizona 5th | R | 252 CHOB | (202) 225-2635 | Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary | |
Florida 12th | R | 2306 RHOB | (202) 225-5755 | Energy and Commerce | |
North Carolina 8th | R | 2459 RHOB | (202) 225-1976 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
Georgia 2nd | D | 2407 RHOB | (202) 225-3631 | Agriculture|Appropriations | |
Oregon 3rd | D | 1111 LHOB | (202) 225-4811 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
Delaware At Large | D | 1724 LHOB | (202) 225-4165 | Energy and Commerce | |
Colorado 3rd | R | 1713 LHOB | (202) 225-4761 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
Oregon 1st | D | 2231 RHOB | (202) 225-0855 | Education and the Workforce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Illinois 12th | R | 352 CHOB | (202) 225-5661 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Veterans' Affairs | |
New York 16th | D | 345 CHOB | (202) 225-2464 | Education and the Workforce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Pennsylvania 2nd | D | 1502 LHOB | (202) 225-6111 | Budget | |
Oklahoma 2nd | R | 1208 LHOB | (202) 225-2701 | Budget|Homeland Security | |
Ohio 11th | D | 449 CHOB | (202) 225-7032 | Agriculture|Oversight and Accountability|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
California 26th | D | 2262 RHOB | (202) 225-5811 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Veterans' Affairs | |
Florida 16th | R | 2110 RHOB | (202) 225-5015 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
Indiana 8th | R | 2313 RHOB | (202) 225-4636 | Energy and Commerce | |
Illinois 13th | D | 1009 LHOB | (202) 225-2371 | Agriculture|Veterans' Affairs | |
Tennessee 2nd | R | 1122 LHOB | (202) 225-5435 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Texas 26th | R | 2161 RHOB | (202) 225-7772 | Budget|Energy and Commerce|Rules | |
Missouri 7th | R | 1108 LHOB | (202) 225-6536 | Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Missouri 1st | D | 2463 RHOB | (202) 225-2406 | Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
California 41st | R | 2205 RHOB | (202) 225-1986 | Appropriations | |
Florida 3rd | R | 2421 RHOB | (202) 225-5744 | Agriculture|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Energy and Commerce | |
Colorado 8th | D | 1024 LHOB | (202) 225-5625 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology | |
California 24th | D | 2331 RHOB | (202) 225-3601 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
California 29th | D | 2181 RHOB | (202) 225-6131 | Energy and Commerce | |
Ohio 15th | R | 1433 LHOB | (202) 225-2015 | House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library|Ways and Means | |
Alabama 1st | R | 1330 LHOB | (202) 225-4931 | Appropriations|Natural Resources | |
Indiana 7th | D | 2135 RHOB | (202) 225-4011 | Intelligence|Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Georgia 1st | R | 2432 RHOB | (202) 225-5831 | Budget|Energy and Commerce | |
Texas 31st | R | 2208 RHOB | (202) 225-3864 | Appropriations | |
Louisiana 2nd | D | 442 CHOB | (202) 225-6636 | Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Pennsylvania 8th | D | 2102 RHOB | (202) 225-5546 | Appropriations | |
Texas 35th | D | 1339 LHOB | (202) 225-5645 | Agriculture|Oversight and Accountability | |
Hawaii 1st | D | 2210 RHOB | (202) 225-2726 | Appropriations|Natural Resources | |
Illinois 6th | D | 2440 RHOB | (202) 225-4561 | Financial Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Florida 14th | D | 2052 RHOB | (202) 225-3376 | Energy and Commerce|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Texas 20th | D | 2241 RHOB | (202) 225-3236 | Foreign Affairs|Intelligence | |
Oregon 5th | R | 1722 LHOB | (202) 225-5711 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Florida 20th | D | 242 CHOB | (202) 225-1313 | Foreign Affairs|Veterans' Affairs | |
California 28th | D | 2423 RHOB | (202) 225-5464 | Small Business|Ways and Means | |
Arizona 6th | R | 1429 LHOB | (202) 225-2542 | Appropriations|Veterans' Affairs | |
Massachusetts 5th | D | 2368 RHOB | (202) 225-2836 | ||
New York 9th | D | 2058 RHOB | (202) 225-6231 | Homeland Security|Energy and Commerce | |
Missouri 5th | D | 2217 RHOB | (202) 225-4535 | Financial Services | |
Virginia 6th | R | 2443 RHOB | (202) 225-5431 | Appropriations|Budget|Judiciary|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Texas 27th | R | 171 CHOB | (202) 225-7742 | Appropriations|Oversight and Accountability|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
South Carolina 6th | D | 274 CHOB | (202) 225-3315 | ||
Georgia 9th | R | 445 CHOB | (202) 225-9893 | Appropriations | |
Tennessee 9th | D | 2268 RHOB | (202) 225-3265 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Oklahoma 4th | R | 2207 RHOB | (202) 225-6165 | Appropriations | |
Georgia 10th | R | 1223 LHOB | (202) 225-4101 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Kentucky 1st | R | 2410 RHOB | (202) 225-3115 | Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
Virginia 11th | D | 2265 RHOB | (202) 225-1492 | Foreign Affairs|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability | |
California 46th | D | 2301 RHOB | (202) 225-2965 | Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
California 21st | D | 2081 RHOB | (202) 225-3341 | Agriculture|Foreign Affairs | |
Connecticut 2nd | D | 2449 RHOB | (202) 225-2076 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce | |
Minnesota 2nd | D | 2442 RHOB | (202) 225-2271 | Agriculture|Energy and Commerce | |
Arizona 2nd | R | 1229 LHOB | (202) 225-3361 | Homeland Security|Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
Arkansas 1st | R | 2422 RHOB | (202) 225-4076 | Agriculture|Intelligence|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Texas 2nd | R | 248 CHOB | (202) 225-6565 | Energy and Commerce|Intelligence | |
Texas 30th | D | 1616 LHOB | (202) 225-8885 | Agriculture|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability | |
Colorado 6th | D | 1323 LHOB | (202) 225-7882 | Foreign Affairs|Intelligence | |
Texas 28th | D | 2372 RHOB | (202) 225-1640 | Appropriations | |
Utah 3rd | R | 2323 RHOB | (202) 225-7751 | Energy and Commerce|Natural Resources |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New York 4th | R | 1508 LHOB | (202) 225-5516 | House Administration|Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Kansas 3rd | D | 2435 RHOB | (202) 225-2865 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
Ohio 8th | R | 2113 RHOB | (202) 225-6205 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt | |
Illinois 7th | D | 2159 RHOB | (202) 225-5006 | Ways and Means | |
North Carolina 1st | D | 1123 LHOB | (202) 225-3101 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
Pennsylvania 4th | D | 150 CHOB | (202) 225-4731 | Foreign Affairs|Judiciary | |
Colorado 1st | D | 2111 RHOB | (202) 225-4431 | Energy and Commerce | |
Texas 15th | R | 1415 LHOB | (202) 225-9901 | Agriculture|Financial Services | |
Connecticut 3rd | D | 2413 RHOB | (202) 225-3661 | Appropriations | |
Washington 1st | D | 2330 RHOB | (202) 225-6311 | Ways and Means | |
Pennsylvania 17th | D | 1222 LHOB | (202) 225-2301 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
California 10th | D | 503 CHOB | (202) 225-2095 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure|Ethics | |
Tennessee 4th | R | 2304 RHOB | (202) 225-6831 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
Florida 26th | R | 374 CHOB | (202) 225-4211 | Appropriations | |
Michigan 6th | D | 102 CHOB | (202) 225-4071 | Energy and Commerce|Natural Resources|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
Texas 37th | D | 2307 RHOB | (202) 225-4865 | Budget|Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
Florida 19th | R | 1719 LHOB | (202) 225-2536 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
California 13th | R | 1535 LHOB | (202) 225-1947 | Agriculture|Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
South Carolina 3rd | R | 2229 RHOB | (202) 225-5301 | Energy and Commerce | |
Florida 2nd | R | 466 CHOB | (202) 225-5235 | Energy and Commerce|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
North Carolina 11th | R | 1505 LHOB | (202) 225-6401 | Appropriations|Budget | |
Texas 6th | R | 1721 LHOB | (202) 225-2002 | Appropriations|Small Business | |
Minnesota 6th | R | 464 CHOB | (202) 225-2331 | Financial Services | |
Texas 16th | D | 2448 RHOB | (202) 225-4831 | Armed Services|Judiciary|Ethics | |
California 16th | D | 272 CHOB | (202) 225-8104 | Energy and Commerce | |
New York 13th | D | 2332 RHOB | (202) 225-4365 | Appropriations|Budget | |
Kansas 4th | R | 2234 RHOB | (202) 225-6216 | Budget|Education and the Workforce|Ways and Means | |
Pennsylvania 3rd | D | 1105 LHOB | (202) 225-4001 | Ways and Means | |
Mississippi 4th | R | 443 CHOB | (202) 225-5772 | Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Texas 4th | R | 2416 RHOB | (202) 225-6673 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
Iowa 4th | R | 1440 LHOB | (202) 225-4426 | Agriculture|Ways and Means | |
Georgia 3rd | R | 2239 RHOB | (202) 225-5901 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
Minnesota 1st | R | 1605 LHOB | (202) 225-2472 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
Minnesota 7th | R | 1004 LHOB | (202) 225-2165 | Budget|Rules|Ethics|Ways and Means | |
Wisconsin 5th | R | 1507 LHOB | (202) 225-5101 | Financial Services|Judiciary | |
Pennsylvania 1st | R | 271 CHOB | (202) 225-4276 | Intelligence|Ways and Means | |
Tennessee 3rd | R | 2187 RHOB | (202) 225-3271 | Appropriations|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Texas 7th | D | 346 CHOB | (202) 225-2571 | Energy and Commerce | |
Nebraska 1st | R | 343 CHOB | (202) 225-4806 | Financial Services | |
California 20th | R | 2468 RHOB | (202) 225-2915 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Illinois 11th | D | 2366 RHOB | (202) 225-3515 | Financial Services | |
North Carolina 4th | D | 1716 LHOB | (202) 225-1784 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
North Carolina 5th | R | 2462 RHOB | (202) 225-2071 | Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
Florida 22nd | D | 2305 RHOB | (202) 225-9890 | Appropriations | |
Florida 18th | R | 249 CHOB | (202) 225-1252 | Appropriations|Science, Space, and Technology|Veterans' Affairs | |
Florida 10th | D | 1224 LHOB | (202) 225-2176 | Oversight and Accountability|Science, Space, and Technology | |
South Carolina 7th | R | 1626 LHOB | (202) 225-9895 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary | |
Idaho 1st | R | 1514 LHOB | (202) 225-6611 | Energy and Commerce|Natural Resources |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Florida 1st | R | 2021 RHOB | (202) 225-4136 | Armed Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Judiciary | |
- Vacancy | Wisconsin 8th | 1211 LHOB | (202) 225-5665 | ||
Arizona 3rd | D | 1114 LHOB | (202) 225-4065 | Armed Services|Natural Resources | |
California 8th | D | 2004 RHOB | (202) 225-1880 | Armed Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
New York 2nd | R | 2344 RHOB | (202) 225-7896 | Financial Services|Homeland Security|Ethics | |
Illinois 4th | D | 1519 LHOB | (202) 225-8203 | Transportation and Infrastructure | |
California 27th | R | 144 CHOB | (202) 225-1956 | Appropriations|Intelligence|Science, Space, and Technology | |
California 42nd | D | 1305 LHOB | (202) 225-7924 | Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
Texas 29th | D | 2419 RHOB | (202) 225-1688 | Financial Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt | |
Florida 28th | R | 448 CHOB | (202) 225-2778 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Maine 2nd | D | 1710 LHOB | (202) 225-6306 | Armed Services|Small Business | |
New York 10th | D | 245 CHOB | (202) 225-7944 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security | |
California 34th | D | 506 CHOB | (202) 225-6235 | Intelligence|Ways and Means | |
Texas 23rd | R | 2244 RHOB | (202) 225-4511 | Appropriations|Homeland Security | |
Texas 34th | D | 154 CHOB | (202) 225-2531 | Financial Services | |
Puerto Rico Resident Commissioner | R | 2338 RHOB | (202) 225-2615 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Virginia 5th | R | 461 CHOB | (202) 225-4711 | Budget|Education and the Workforce | |
Texas 5th | R | 2431 RHOB | (202) 225-3484 | Armed Services|Judiciary | |
Arizona 9th | R | 2057 RHOB | (202) 225-2315 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
New Jersey 5th | D | 203 CHOB | (202) 225-4465 | Financial Services|Intelligence | |
Texas 12th | R | 2308 RHOB | (202) 225-5071 | Appropriations | |
Louisiana 6th | R | 2402 RHOB | (202) 225-3901 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Missouri 6th | R | 1135 LHOB | (202) 225-7041 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Texas 9th | D | 2347 RHOB | (202) 225-7508 | Financial Services | |
Tennessee 7th | R | 2446 RHOB | (202) 225-2811 | Foreign Affairs|Homeland Security | |
Georgia 14th | R | 403 CHOB | (202) 225-5211 | Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
Virginia 9th | R | 2202 RHOB | (202) 225-3861 | House Administration|Energy and Commerce | |
Arizona 7th | D | 1203 LHOB | (202) 225-2435 | Education and the Workforce|Natural Resources | |
Wisconsin 6th | R | 1511 LHOB | (202) 225-2476 | Budget|Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
Mississippi 3rd | R | 450 CHOB | (202) 225-5031 | Appropriations|Homeland Security|Ethics | |
Kentucky 2nd | R | 2434 RHOB | (202) 225-3501 | Energy and Commerce |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wyoming At Large | R | 1531 LHOB | (202) 225-2311 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Natural Resources|Judiciary | |
California 9th | D | 209 CHOB | (202) 225-4540 | Appropriations | |
Maryland 1st | R | 1536 LHOB | (202) 225-5311 | Appropriations | |
Tennessee 1st | R | 167 CHOB | (202) 225-6356 | Energy and Commerce | |
Connecticut 5th | D | 2458 RHOB | (202) 225-4476 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce | |
Oklahoma 1st | R | 1019 LHOB | (202) 225-2211 | Ways and Means | |
Louisiana 3rd | R | 572 CHOB | (202) 225-2031 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Homeland Security | |
Arkansas 2nd | R | 1533 LHOB | (202) 225-2506 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs|Intelligence | |
Connecticut 4th | D | 2137 RHOB | (202) 225-5541 | Financial Services|Intelligence | |
Iowa 2nd | R | 1717 LHOB | (202) 225-2911 | Appropriations|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Nevada 4th | D | 406 CHOB | (202) 225-9894 | Armed Services|Financial Services | |
Indiana 9th | R | 1632 LHOB | (202) 225-5315 | Financial Services|Education and the Workforce|Rules | |
Pennsylvania 6th | D | 1727 LHOB | (202) 225-4315 | Armed Services|Intelligence | |
Maryland 5th | D | 1705 LHOB | (202) 225-4131 | Appropriations | |
Oregon 4th | D | 1620 LHOB | (202) 225-6416 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
North Carolina 9th | R | 2112 RHOB | (202) 225-3715 | Energy and Commerce | |
California 2nd | D | 2445 RHOB | (202) 225-5161 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Michigan 4th | R | 2232 RHOB | (202) 225-4401 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
Texas 38th | R | 1520 LHOB | (202) 225-5646 | Natural Resources|Judiciary|Small Business |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
California 48th | R | 2108 RHOB | (202) 225-5672 | Foreign Affairs|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Judiciary|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Maryland 4th | D | 1529 LHOB | (202) 225-8699 | Homeland Security|Judiciary|Ethics |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
North Carolina 14th | D | 1318 LHOB | (202) 225-5634 | Armed Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Illinois 1st | D | 1641 LHOB | (202) 225-4372 | Agriculture|Foreign Affairs | |
Texas 13th | R | 446 CHOB | (202) 225-3706 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Intelligence|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
- Vacancy | Texas 18th | 2314 RHOB | (202) 225-3816 | ||
California 51st | D | 1314 LHOB | (202) 225-2040 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs | |
Michigan 10th | R | 1319 LHOB | (202) 225-4961 | Foreign Affairs|Energy and Commerce | |
Washington 7th | D | 2346 RHOB | (202) 225-3106 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary | |
New York 8th | D | 2433 RHOB | (202) 225-5936 | ||
South Dakota At Large | R | 1714 LHOB | (202) 225-2801 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Georgia 4th | D | 2240 RHOB | (202) 225-1605 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Louisiana 4th | R | 568 CHOB | (202) 225-2777 | ||
Ohio 4th | R | 2056 RHOB | (202) 225-2676 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability|Judiciary | |
Ohio 14th | R | 2065 RHOB | (202) 225-5731 | Appropriations|Ethics | |
Pennsylvania 13th | R | 152 CHOB | (202) 225-2431 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
California 37th | D | 1419 LHOB | (202) 225-7084 | Foreign Affairs|Natural Resources | |
Ohio 9th | D | 2186 RHOB | (202) 225-4146 | Appropriations | |
New Jersey 7th | R | 251 CHOB | (202) 225-5361 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Massachusetts 9th | D | 2351 RHOB | (202) 225-3111 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs | |
Pennsylvania 16th | R | 1707 LHOB | (202) 225-5406 | Ways and Means | |
Illinois 2nd | D | 2329 RHOB | (202) 225-0773 | Energy and Commerce | |
Mississippi 1st | R | 2243 RHOB | (202) 225-4306 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Intelligence | |
New York 26th | D | 2269 RHOB | (202) 225-3306 | Homeland Security|Veterans' Affairs | |
California 17th | D | 306 CHOB | (202) 225-2631 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Virginia 2nd | R | 1037 LHOB | (202) 225-4215 | Armed Services|Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs | |
Michigan 8th | D | 200 CHOB | (202) 225-3611 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
California 3rd | R | 1032 LHOB | (202) 225-2523 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Washington 6th | D | 1226 LHOB | (202) 225-5916 | Appropriations|House Administration | |
New Jersey 3rd | D | 2444 RHOB | (202) 225-4765 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
California 40th | R | 1306 LHOB | (202) 225-4111 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
Illinois 8th | D | 2367 RHOB | (202) 225-3711 | Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
New Hampshire 2nd | D | 2201 RHOB | (202) 225-5206 | Energy and Commerce | |
Tennessee 8th | R | 560 CHOB | (202) 225-4714 | Ways and Means |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Illinois 16th | R | 1424 LHOB | (202) 225-6201 | Intelligence|Ways and Means|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
New York 1st | R | 1530 LHOB | (202) 225-3826 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Small Business | |
California 1st | R | 408 CHOB | (202) 225-3076 | Agriculture|Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Colorado 5th | R | 2371 RHOB | (202) 225-4422 | Armed Services|Natural Resources | |
Ohio 1st | D | 1432 LHOB | (202) 225-2216 | Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
New York 23rd | R | 1630 LHOB | (202) 225-3161 | Agriculture|Oversight and Accountability|Rules | |
Washington 2nd | D | 2163 RHOB | (202) 225-2605 | Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Connecticut 1st | D | 1501 LHOB | (202) 225-2265 | Ways and Means | |
Ohio 5th | R | 2467 RHOB | (202) 225-6405 | Energy and Commerce | |
Kansas 2nd | R | 2441 RHOB | (202) 225-6601 | Appropriations|Oversight and Accountability | |
New York 17th | R | 1013 LHOB | (202) 225-6506 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
California 12th | D | 2470 RHOB | (202) 225-2661 | Appropriations|Budget | |
Florida 15th | R | 1118 LHOB | (202) 225-5626 | House Administration|Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
Pennsylvania 12th | D | 243 CHOB | (202) 225-2135 | Oversight and Accountability|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Nevada 3rd | D | 365 CHOB | (202) 225-3252 | Appropriations|Natural Resources | |
New Mexico 3rd | D | 1510 LHOB | (202) 225-6190 | Education and the Workforce|Natural Resources|Rules | |
Arizona 8th | R | 1214 LHOB | (202) 225-4576 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
Louisiana 5th | R | 142 CHOB | (202) 225-8490 | Appropriations|Education and the Workforce | |
California 49th | D | 2352 RHOB | (202) 225-3906 | Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs | |
California 36th | D | 2454 RHOB | (202) 225-3976 | Foreign Affairs|Judiciary | |
California 18th | D | 1401 LHOB | (202) 225-3072 | Judiciary|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Colorado 4th | R | 2455 RHOB | (202) 225-4676 | Budget|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Georgia 11th | R | 2133 RHOB | (202) 225-2931 | Financial Services|House Administration | |
Oklahoma 3rd | R | 2405 RHOB | (202) 225-5565 | Agriculture|Financial Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Missouri 3rd | R | 2230 RHOB | (202) 225-2956 | Financial Services|Small Business|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Florida 13th | R | 1017 LHOB | (202) 225-5961 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
Texas 8th | R | 1320 LHOB | (202) 225-4901 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Veterans' Affairs | |
Massachusetts 8th | D | 2109 RHOB | (202) 225-8273 | Financial Services|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Oversight and Accountability |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
South Carolina 1st | R | 1728 LHOB | (202) 225-3176 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Veterans' Affairs | |
Rhode Island 2nd | D | 1218 LHOB | (202) 225-2735 | Homeland Security|Natural Resources | |
New York 11th | R | 351 CHOB | (202) 225-3371 | Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic|Ways and Means | |
Utah 2nd | R | 166 CHOB | (202) 225-9730 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
Kansas 1st | R | 344 CHOB | (202) 225-2715 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
North Carolina 6th | D | 307 CHOB | (202) 225-3065 | Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs | |
Kentucky 4th | R | 2453 RHOB | (202) 225-3465 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure|Rules | |
Florida 21st | R | 2182 RHOB | (202) 225-3026 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
California 7th | D | 2311 RHOB | (202) 225-7163 | Energy and Commerce | |
Georgia 7th | D | 2246 RHOB | (202) 225-4501 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary | |
Texas 10th | R | 2300 RHOB | (202) 225-2401 | Foreign Affairs|Homeland Security | |
Michigan 9th | R | 444 CHOB | (202) 225-2106 | Armed Services|Budget|Education and the Workforce|Oversight and Accountability | |
Virginia 4th | D | 2417 RHOB | (202) 225-6365 | Armed Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
California 5th | R | 2256 RHOB | (202) 225-2511 | Budget|Natural Resources|Judiciary | |
Minnesota 4th | D | 2426 RHOB | (202) 225-6631 | Appropriations | |
Georgia 6th | R | 1213 LHOB | (202) 225-4272 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Science, Space, and Technology|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
Kentucky 3rd | D | 1527 LHOB | (202) 225-5401 | Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
Massachusetts 2nd | D | 370 CHOB | (202) 225-6101 | Agriculture|Rules | |
North Carolina 10th | R | 2134 RHOB | (202) 225-2576 | Financial Services | |
New York 5th | D | 2310 RHOB | (202) 225-3461 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
New Jersey 8th | D | 1007 LHOB | (202) 225-7919 | Homeland Security|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
New York 6th | D | 2209 RHOB | (202) 225-2601 | Appropriations | |
Pennsylvania 9th | R | 350 CHOB | (202) 225-6511 | Financial Services|Small Business | |
Maryland 7th | D | 2263 RHOB | (202) 225-4741 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
West Virginia 1st | R | 465 CHOB | (202) 225-3452 | Ways and Means | |
Illinois 15th | R | 1740 LHOB | (202) 225-5271 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce | |
Ohio 7th | R | 143 CHOB | (202) 225-3876 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Iowa 1st | R | 1034 LHOB | (202) 225-6576 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic|Veterans' Affairs | |
Florida 7th | R | 1237 LHOB | (202) 225-4035 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs | |
New York 19th | R | 1207 LHOB | (202) 225-5441 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
Michigan 2nd | R | 246 CHOB | (202) 225-3561 | Appropriations|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
West Virginia 2nd | R | 2228 RHOB | (202) 225-2711 | Financial Services | |
Alabama 2nd | R | 1504 LHOB | (202) 225-2901 | Agriculture|Judiciary | |
Utah 1st | R | 1131 LHOB | (202) 225-0453 | Budget|Ways and Means | |
Wisconsin 4th | D | 2252 RHOB | (202) 225-4572 | Ways and Means | |
Texas 1st | R | 1541 LHOB | (202) 225-3035 | Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs|Judiciary | |
New York 25th | D | 570 CHOB | (202) 225-3615 | Appropriations|House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library | |
Florida 23rd | D | 1130 LHOB | (202) 225-3001 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability | |
Massachusetts 6th | D | 1126 LHOB | (202) 225-8020 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Guam Delegate | R | 1628 LHOB | (202) 225-1188 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Natural Resources | |
Indiana 1st | D | 1607 LHOB | (202) 225-2461 | Education and the Workforce|Veterans' Affairs | |
California 15th | D | 1404 LHOB | (202) 225-3531 | Natural Resources|Science, Space, and Technology | |
North Carolina 3rd | R | 407 CHOB | (202) 225-3415 | House Administration|Veterans' Affairs|Ways and Means |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New York 12th | D | 2132 RHOB | (202) 225-5635 | Judiciary | |
California 31st | D | 1610 LHOB | (202) 225-5256 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Massachusetts 1st | D | 372 CHOB | (202) 225-5601 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
Colorado 2nd | D | 2400 RHOB | (202) 225-2161 | Natural Resources|Judiciary|Rules | |
Texas 22nd | R | 1104 LHOB | (202) 225-5951 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Washington 4th | R | 504 CHOB | (202) 225-5816 | Appropriations|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
North Carolina 13th | D | 1133 LHOB | (202) 225-4531 | Financial Services | |
New Jersey 1st | D | 2427 RHOB | (202) 225-6501 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce | |
South Carolina 5th | R | 569 CHOB | (202) 225-5501 | Financial Services|Budget|Rules | |
District of Columbia Delegate | D | 2136 RHOB | (202) 225-8050 | Oversight and Accountability|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Iowa 3rd | R | 1232 LHOB | (202) 225-5476 | Agriculture|Financial Services |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
California 23rd | R | 1029 LHOB | (202) 225-5861 | Energy and Commerce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
New York 14th | D | 250 CHOB | (202) 225-3965 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
Tennessee 5th | R | 151 CHOB | (202) 225-4311 | Financial Services | |
Minnesota 5th | D | 1730 LHOB | (202) 225-4755 | Budget|Education and the Workforce | |
Utah 4th | R | 309 CHOB | (202) 225-3011 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New Jersey 6th | D | 2107 RHOB | (202) 225-4671 | Energy and Commerce | |
Alabama 6th | R | 170 CHOB | (202) 225-4921 | Oversight and Accountability|Energy and Commerce | |
California 19th | D | 304 CHOB | (202) 225-2861 | Armed Services|Budget|Ways and Means | |
New Hampshire 1st | D | 452 CHOB | (202) 225-5456 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business|Veterans' Affairs | |
- Vacancy | New Jersey 9th | 2409 RHOB | (202) 225-5751 | ||
- Vacancy | New Jersey 10th | 106 CHOB | (202) 225-3436 | ||
California 11th | D | 1236 LHOB | (202) 225-4965 | ||
Alaska At Large | D | 153 CHOB | (202) 225-5765 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Indiana 6th | R | 404 CHOB | (202) 225-3021 | Energy and Commerce | |
Washington 3rd | D | 1431 LHOB | (202) 225-3536 | Agriculture|Small Business | |
Pennsylvania 10th | R | 2160 RHOB | (202) 225-5836 | Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
California 50th | D | 1201 LHOB | (202) 225-0508 | Budget|Energy and Commerce | |
Colorado 7th | D | 1230 LHOB | (202) 225-2645 | Financial Services | |
Texas 11th | R | 1124 LHOB | (202) 225-3605 | Homeland Security|Energy and Commerce | |
Minnesota 3rd | D | 2452 RHOB | (202) 225-2871 | Foreign Affairs|Small Business | |
Maine 1st | D | 2354 RHOB | (202) 225-6116 | Agriculture|Appropriations | |
Virgin Islands Delegate | D | 2059 RHOB | (202) 225-1790 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Intelligence | |
Wisconsin 2nd | D | 1026 LHOB | (202) 225-2906 | Appropriations | |
California 47th | D | 1233 LHOB | (202) 225-5611 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
Florida 8th | R | 2150 RHOB | (202) 225-3671 | Financial Services|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Massachusetts 7th | D | 402 CHOB | (202) 225-5111 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Illinois 5th | D | 2083 RHOB | (202) 225-4061 | Appropriations |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
American Samoa Delegate | R | 2001 RHOB | (202) 225-8577 | Foreign Affairs|Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs | |
Illinois 3rd | D | 1523 LHOB | (202) 225-5701 | Homeland Security|Veterans' Affairs | |
Maryland 8th | D | 2242 RHOB | (202) 225-5341 | Oversight and Accountability | |
Pennsylvania 14th | R | 342 CHOB | (202) 225-2065 | Appropriations|Rules | |
Washington 5th | R | 2188 RHOB | (202) 225-2006 | Energy and Commerce | |
Kentucky 5th | R | 2406 RHOB | (202) 225-4601 | Appropriations | |
Alabama 3rd | R | 2469 RHOB | (202) 225-3261 | Armed Services | |
Tennessee 6th | R | 2238 RHOB | (202) 225-4231 | Agriculture|Financial Services | |
Montana 2nd | R | 1023 LHOB | (202) 225-3211 | Natural Resources|Veterans' Affairs | |
North Carolina 2nd | D | 1221 LHOB | (202) 225-3032 | Judiciary|Ethics|Science, Space, and Technology|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
North Carolina 7th | R | 2333 RHOB | (202) 225-2731 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Texas 21st | R | 103 CHOB | (202) 225-4236 | Budget|Judiciary|Rules | |
California 25th | D | 2342 RHOB | (202) 225-5330 | Energy and Commerce|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
Ohio 6th | R | 2082 RHOB | (202) 225-5705 | Education and the Workforce|Judiciary | |
Maryland 2nd | D | 2206 RHOB | (202) 225-3061 | Appropriations | |
Florida 5th | R | 1711 LHOB | (202) 225-2501 | Appropriations|Ethics | |
New York 18th | D | 1030 LHOB | (202) 225-5614 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Northern Mariana Islands Delegate | D | 2267 RHOB | (202) 225-2646 | Education and the Workforce|Natural Resources | |
Florida 27th | R | 2162 RHOB | (202) 225-3931 | Foreign Affairs|Small Business | |
Oregon 6th | D | 109 CHOB | (202) 225-5643 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology | |
California 38th | D | 2428 RHOB | (202) 225-6676 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Ways and Means | |
Maryland 3rd | D | 2370 RHOB | (202) 225-4016 | Energy and Commerce | |
Louisiana 1st | R | 2049 RHOB | (202) 225-3015 | ||
Pennsylvania 5th | D | 1227 LHOB | (202) 225-2011 | Judiciary|Rules | |
Illinois 9th | D | 2408 RHOB | (202) 225-2111 | Budget|Energy and Commerce | |
California 30th | D | 2309 RHOB | (202) 225-4176 | Judiciary | |
Illinois 10th | D | 300 CHOB | (202) 225-4835 | Foreign Affairs|Ways and Means | |
Michigan 3rd | D | 1317 LHOB | (202) 225-3831 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
Washington 8th | D | 1110 LHOB | (202) 225-7761 | Energy and Commerce | |
Arizona 1st | R | 460 CHOB | (202) 225-2190 | Ways and Means | |
Georgia 8th | R | 2185 RHOB | (202) 225-6531 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Intelligence|Rules | |
Georgia 13th | D | 468 CHOB | (202) 225-2939 | Agriculture|Financial Services | |
Virginia 3rd | D | 2328 RHOB | (202) 225-8351 | Budget|Education and the Workforce | |
Texas 3rd | R | 1113 LHOB | (202) 225-4201 | Foreign Affairs|Veterans' Affairs | |
Texas 17th | R | 2204 RHOB | (202) 225-6105 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
Alabama 7th | D | 1035 LHOB | (202) 225-2665 | Armed Services|House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library|Ways and Means | |
California 32nd | D | 2365 RHOB | (202) 225-5911 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
New Jersey 11th | D | 1427 LHOB | (202) 225-5034 | Armed Services|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Idaho 2nd | R | 2084 RHOB | (202) 225-5531 | Appropriations | |
Michigan 7th | D | 2245 RHOB | (202) 225-4872 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
Washington 9th | D | 2264 RHOB | (202) 225-8901 | Armed Services | |
Nebraska 3rd | R | 502 CHOB | (202) 225-6435 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
New Jersey 4th | R | 2373 RHOB | (202) 225-3765 | Foreign Affairs | |
Missouri 8th | R | 1011 LHOB | (202) 225-4404 | Joint Committee on Taxation|Ways and Means | |
Pennsylvania 11th | R | 302 CHOB | (202) 225-2411 | Budget|Education and the Workforce|Ways and Means | |
Illinois 17th | D | 1205 LHOB | (202) 225-5905 | Agriculture|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Florida 9th | D | 2353 RHOB | (202) 225-9889 | Agriculture|Energy and Commerce | |
Virginia 7th | D | 562 CHOB | (202) 225-2815 | Agriculture|Intelligence | |
Indiana 5th | R | 1609 LHOB | (202) 225-2276 | Judiciary | |
New Mexico 1st | D | 1421 LHOB | (202) 225-6316 | Oversight and Accountability|Natural Resources | |
Arizona 4th | D | 207 CHOB | (202) 225-9888 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Minnesota 8th | R | 145 CHOB | (202) 225-6211 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure|Small Business | |
California 45th | R | 1127 LHOB | (202) 225-2415 | Education and the Workforce|Ways and Means|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
New York 21st | R | 2211 RHOB | (202) 225-4611 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Intelligence | |
Wisconsin 1st | R | 1526 LHOB | (202) 225-3031 | Financial Services|House Administration|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library | |
Florida 17th | R | 2457 RHOB | (202) 225-5792 | Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt|Ways and Means | |
Michigan 11th | D | 2411 RHOB | (202) 225-8171 | Education and the Workforce|Science, Space, and Technology|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Washington 10th | D | 1708 LHOB | (202) 225-9740 | Armed Services|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Alabama 5th | R | 1337 LHOB | (202) 225-4801 | Armed Services|Homeland Security|Science, Space, and Technology | |
New York 3rd | D | 1117 LHOB | (202) 225-3335 | Budget|Homeland Security | |
California 14th | D | 174 CHOB | (202) 225-5065 | Homeland Security|Judiciary | |
Ohio 13th | D | 1217 LHOB | (202) 225-6265 | Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
California 39th | D | 2078 RHOB | (202) 225-2305 | Education and the Workforce|Veterans' Affairs | |
New York 24th | R | 2349 RHOB | (202) 225-3665 | Science, Space, and Technology|Ways and Means | |
Michigan 13th | D | 1039 LHOB | (202) 225-5802 | Homeland Security|Small Business | |
Mississippi 2nd | D | 2466 RHOB | (202) 225-5876 | Homeland Security | |
Pennsylvania 15th | R | 400 CHOB | (202) 225-5121 | Agriculture|Education and the Workforce | |
California 4th | D | 268 CHOB | (202) 225-3311 | Ways and Means | |
Wisconsin 7th | R | 451 CHOB | (202) 225-3365 | Natural Resources|Judiciary | |
South Carolina 4th | R | 267 CHOB | (202) 225-6030 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
Nevada 1st | D | 2464 RHOB | (202) 225-5965 | Foreign Affairs|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Michigan 12th | D | 2438 RHOB | (202) 225-5126 | Financial Services|Oversight and Accountability | |
Hawaii 2nd | D | 1005 LHOB | (202) 225-4906 | Agriculture|Armed Services|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic | |
New York 20th | D | 2369 RHOB | (202) 225-5076 | Energy and Commerce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
California 35th | D | 2227 RHOB | (202) 225-6161 | Appropriations|House Administration | |
New York 15th | D | 1414 LHOB | (202) 225-4361 | Financial Services|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Massachusetts 3rd | D | 2439 RHOB | (202) 225-3411 | Energy and Commerce | |
Maryland 6th | D | 2404 RHOB | (202) 225-2721 | Appropriations|Budget | |
Ohio 10th | R | 2183 RHOB | (202) 225-6465 | Armed Services|Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Illinois 14th | D | 1410 LHOB | (202) 225-2976 | Appropriations |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
California 22nd | R | 2465 RHOB | (202) 225-4695 | Appropriations|Budget|Joint Committee of Congress on the Library | |
New Jersey 2nd | R | 2447 RHOB | (202) 225-6572 | Judiciary|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Texas 24th | R | 1725 LHOB | (202) 225-6605 | Small Business|Ways and Means | |
Wisconsin 3rd | R | 1513 LHOB | (202) 225-5506 | Agriculture|Transportation and Infrastructure|Veterans' Affairs | |
California 52nd | D | 2334 RHOB | (202) 225-8045 | Financial Services | |
New Mexico 2nd | D | 1517 LHOB | (202) 225-2365 | Agriculture|Armed Services | |
Texas 33rd | D | 2348 RHOB | (202) 225-9897 | Armed Services|Energy and Commerce | |
New York 7th | D | 2302 RHOB | (202) 225-2361 | Financial Services|Natural Resources|Small Business |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Missouri 2nd | R | 2350 RHOB | (202) 225-1621 | Financial Services|Foreign Affairs | |
Michigan 5th | R | 2266 RHOB | (202) 225-6276 | Education and the Workforce|Energy and Commerce | |
Florida 6th | R | 244 CHOB | (202) 225-2706 | Armed Services|Foreign Affairs|Oversight and Accountability|Intelligence | |
Florida 25th | D | 270 CHOB | (202) 225-7931 | Appropriations|Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Fed Govt | |
California 43rd | D | 2221 RHOB | (202) 225-2201 | Financial Services | |
New Jersey 12th | D | 168 CHOB | (202) 225-5801 | Appropriations | |
Texas 14th | R | 107 CHOB | (202) 225-2831 | Energy and Commerce|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Florida 11th | R | 2184 RHOB | (202) 225-1002 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Ohio 2nd | R | 2335 RHOB | (202) 225-3164 | Intelligence|Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic|Ways and Means | |
Arkansas 4th | R | 202 CHOB | (202) 225-3772 | Natural Resources|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
Virginia 10th | D | 1210 LHOB | (202) 225-5136 | Appropriations|Budget | |
Pennsylvania 7th | D | 1027 LHOB | (202) 225-6411 | Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs|Ethics | |
New York 22nd | R | 1022 LHOB | (202) 225-3701 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure|Science, Space, and Technology | |
Georgia 5th | D | 1406 LHOB | (202) 225-3801 | Financial Services | |
Texas 25th | R | 2336 RHOB | (202) 225-9896 | Financial Services|Small Business | |
Florida 24th | D | 2080 RHOB | (202) 225-4506 | Education and the Workforce|Transportation and Infrastructure | |
South Carolina 2nd | R | 1436 LHOB | (202) 225-2452 | Armed Services|Education and the Workforce|Foreign Affairs | |
Virginia 1st | R | 2055 RHOB | (202) 225-4261 | Armed Services|Natural Resources|Select Comm on the Strategic Competition US and China | |
Arkansas 3rd | R | 2412 RHOB | (202) 225-4301 | Appropriations |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Indiana 2nd | R | 349 CHOB | (202) 225-3915 | Budget|Transportation and Infrastructure |
Name | District | Party | Office Room | Phone | Committee Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Montana 1st | R | 512 CHOB | (202) 225-5628 | Appropriations|Foreign Affairs |
The three primary House office buildings—Cannon, Longworth and Rayburn—share a room numbering system for above-ground rooms that might confuse visitors at first. The system is fairly straight forward and can be used to identify most member and committee offices merely by knowing the correct room number regardless of building.
All Cannon above-ground rooms are three digits. As you would expect, the first digit indicates the floor level. For example, 303 Cannon is on the 3rd floor.
All above-ground Longworth rooms are four digits and start with the number 1. The second digit from the left indicates the floor. For example, 1309 is on the third floor of the Longworth building.
All above-ground Rayburn rooms are also four digits, but start with a 2. The second digit indicates the floor number. For example, 2125 is on the first floor of Rayburn.
Library of Congress
Exhibitions.
- Ask a Librarian
- Digital Collections
- Library Catalogs
Creating the United States Creating the United States Constitution
Representation.
Republican purists and residents of large (geographic and population) states wanted representation to be based on population within states or some other contrived district. Those from smaller (geographic and population) states or who on principle wanted to restrict the power of the people wanted representation to be based solely on the state as an individual entity. The creative compromise of the delegates was to devise a bicameral (two-house) national legislature with one house (Senate) having equal representation from each state with the members chosen by the state legislatures and a second house (House of Representatives) having membership based on a proportional population formula and elected by the voters in the states. Where did this idea come from? »
Sect. 1. ALL legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Sect. 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, . . . Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to servitude service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons.
Sect. 3. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years: and each senator shall have one vote.
Connect with the Library
All ways to connect
Subscribe & Comment
- RSS & E-Mail
Download & Play
- iTunesU (external link)
About | Press | Jobs | Donate Inspector General | Legal | Accessibility | External Link Disclaimer | USA.gov
- Skip to main content
- Keyboard shortcuts for audio player
2024 Election
Many voters say congress is broken. could proportional representation fix it.
Hansi Lo Wang
A perimeter fence surrounds the U.S. Capitol in February ahead of President Biden's State of the Union speech in Washington, D.C. Mariam Zuhaib/AP hide caption
A perimeter fence surrounds the U.S. Capitol in February ahead of President Biden's State of the Union speech in Washington, D.C.
With an increasingly polarized Congress and fewer competitive elections , there are growing calls among some election reformers to change how voters elect members of the U.S. House of Representatives.
One potential alternative to the current winner-take-all approach for House races is known as proportional representation.
Instead of the single candidate with the most votes winning a House district's seat, a proportional representation system would elect multiple representatives in each district, distributing seats in the legislature roughly in proportion to the votes each party receives.
Supporters say proportional representation could help temper the rise of political extremism, eliminate the threat of gerrymandering and ensure the fair representation of people of color, as well as voters who are outnumbered in reliably "red" or "blue" parts of the country.
This story is part of a series of reports on alternatives to how U.S. voters cast ballots and elect their political leaders. Click here for more NPR voting stories .
And last year, a group of more than 200 political scientists, legal scholars and historians across the U.S. said the time for Congress to change is now.
"Our arcane, single-member districting process divides, polarizes, and isolates us from each other," they wrote in an open letter to lawmakers. "It has effectively extinguished competitive elections for most Americans, and produced a deeply divided political system that is incapable of responding to changing demands and emerging challenges with necessary legitimacy."
But how exactly proportional representation could change House elections is an open question with major hurdles. There's a federal law that bans it, and many of its supporters acknowledge it would likely be years, if not decades, before a majority of lawmakers allow such a big, untested restructuring of Congress.
What could proportional representation in the House look like?
There's a spectrum of ways to reform the House using proportional representation. Two key factors are how many representatives a multi-member district would have and how winners of House seats would be proportionally allocated.
In 2021, Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia led a group of other House Democrats in reintroducing a proposal that's been floating around Congress since 2017 . The Fair Representation Act would require states to use ranked choice voting for House races. It calls for states with six or more representatives to create districts with three to five members each, and states with fewer than six representatives to elect all of them as at-large members of one statewide district.
Some advocates also raise the possibility of increasing the total number of House seats, which has been stuck at 435 seats for decades .
Stuck At 435 Representatives? Why The U.S. House Hasn't Grown With Census Counts
While there's no consensus on the mechanics, supporters say moving toward proportional representation could allow the country's diversity to be better represented — including in communities where elections, outside of primaries, have become non-competitive.
"When you're looking at New York City, where I live, it's a city of almost 8.5 million people. And there are hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Republican voters who find themselves in districts with lopsided Democratic majorities," says Reihan Salam, a Brooklyn-based Republican who heads the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, and has written in support of proportional representation .
Salam sees proportional representation as "something that would be hugely healthy for our politics to see to it that you don't just have competitive elections in a small, tiny handful of swing districts or swing states."
And that increased competition could push political parties to be more willing to compromise and negotiate, says Didi Kuo, a fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.
Kuo, who has studied versions of proportional representation systems in New Zealand, Italy and Japan, notes that many other democracies around the world have rewritten their rules "when some people are marginalized or excluded from representation, or when votes are not being translated into seats."
"How would you like it if there were a system where you could at least ensure that one person you like gets elected or one person of the party that you support?" Kuo says about what proportional representation could offer.
It could also lead to the rise of more political parties, which supporters say could boost voter turnout by expanding voters' choices in candidates.
But that could come with complications, warns Ruth Bloch Rubin, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Chicago.
"We've seen how difficult it was to elect a speaker with just two parties, that when you introduce multiple parties, it increases the odds that you're going to have collective action problems, coordination problems. It's just going to be slower and harder to get people to reach agreement," says Bloch Rubin, who has written about the potential challenges that could come with switching from the current system of two major parties.
Why is proportional representation in the House against the law?
In 1967, Congress passed a law that bans a House district from electing more than one representative.
Courts hearing redistricting lawsuits at the time were considering ordering states with contested maps to use multi-member districts and hold statewide at-large elections as a temporary fix — a scenario that many lawmakers wanted to avoid. After the Voting Rights Act of 1965 became law, many lawmakers also wanted to block southern states from using multi-member districts and at-large, winner-take-all elections for the House to weaken the voting power of Black voters.
Since then, lawmakers, including Beyer, have introduced bills that would undo that requirement of single-member congressional districts and allow for multi-member districts.
Former Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Campbell of California is seen in 2010. While serving in Congress back in 1999, Campbell testified in support of multi-member districts, which he says he still supports. Paul Sakuma/AP hide caption
While serving in Congress back in 1999, now-former Republican Rep. Tom Campbell of California testified in support of multi-member districts, which he says he still supports.
"No one looks at the House of Representatives today and says, 'There's a good model of functioning governance.' No one says that. And so the interest in trying something else has never been higher," says Campbell, who is now a law professor at Chapman University in Orange, Calif., and has left the GOP to form the Common Sense Party of California.
But in recent years, there's been no public support for proportional representation from Republicans in Congress, which Campbell sees as a sign of how polarized Capitol Hill has become.
"A Republican who puts her name or his name on such a bill will be targeted in the next primary election for the simple reason that you are attempting to move towards a system that might allow more members of Congress who are not Republican," Campbell says.
For many representatives, regardless of party, there's not a lot of incentive to try and disrupt the status quo that got them elected, says Bloch Rubin, the political scientist at the University of Chicago.
"Everyone's adapted their campaign and electoral strategies for the way the rules currently function," Bloch Rubin adds.
Term limits for Congress are wildly popular. But most experts say they'd be a bad idea
The U.S. has a 'primary problem,' say advocates who call for new election systems
How could proportional representation ensure fair representation for people of color.
The U.S. Supreme Court's weakening of the Voting Rights Act over the past decade has helped fuel interest in proportional representation among some civil rights advocates.
While the high court upheld its past rulings on a key remaining section of that landmark law, the loss of other legal protections against racial discrimination in the election process has made it harder to ensure fair representation for people of color around the country.
"If you go into communities of color, they're increasingly disillusioned with the political process. And the system that we have now, in many ways, adds to that disillusionment," says Alora Thomas-Lundborg, strategic director of litigation and advocacy at Harvard Law School's Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice. "It's a winner-take-all system, meaning that if you happen to be in a district where you don't represent the plurality of votes, then you just get no representation and folks feel as though they're not represented. And even when you're in a district where maybe you are being represented, if that district is no longer competitive, you may still feel that your elected representative is not responsive to your needs because they're not out there having to curry your vote."
For communities of color, proportional representation could, in theory, set up a House of Representatives that is more reflective of their shares of the U.S. population, which is becoming increasingly diverse in terms of race and ethnicity, Thomas-Lundborg adds.
But that promise is untested.
Thomas-Lundborg says more state and local governments adopting proportional representation systems could help assuage some concerns about what impact it would actually have in racially and ethnically diverse parts of the country.
"We are at a point where we're asking a lot of questions and trying to think about the future as the nature of the Supreme Court is changing and the demographics of our country is changing," Thomas-Lundborg says. "And it's a really important time to start thinking proactively about these issues."
Edited by Benjamin Swasey
- voting stories
Chapter 11: Congress
Congressional Representation
Learning outcomes.
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Explain the basics of representation
- Describe the extent to which Congress as a body represents the U.S. population
- Explain the concept of collective representation
- Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings
The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office. In this section, we will explore three different models of representation and the concept of descriptive representation. We will look at the way members of Congress navigate the challenging terrain of representation as they serve, and all the many predictable and unpredictable consequences of the decisions they make.
TYPES OF REPRESENTATION: LOOKING OUT FOR CONSTITUENTS
By definition and title, senators and House members are representatives. This means they are intended to be drawn from local populations around the country so they can speak for and make decisions for those local populations, their constituents, while serving in their respective legislative houses. That is, representation refers to an elected leader’s looking out for constituents while carrying out the duties of the office. [1]
Theoretically, the process of constituents voting regularly and reaching out to their representatives helps these congresspersons better represent them. It is considered a given by some in representative democracies that representatives will seldom ignore the wishes of constituents, especially on salient issues that directly affect the district or state. In reality, the job of representing in Congress is often quite complicated, and elected leaders do not always know where their constituents stand. Nor do constituents always agree on everything. Navigating their sometimes contradictory demands and balancing them with the demands of the party, powerful interest groups, ideological concerns, the legislative body, their own personal beliefs, and the country as a whole can be a complicated and frustrating process for representatives.
Traditionally, representatives have seen their role as that of a delegate, a trustee, or someone attempting to balance the two. Representatives who see themselves as delegates believe they are empowered merely to enact the wishes of constituents. Delegates must employ some means to identify the views of their constituents and then vote accordingly. They are not permitted the liberty of employing their own reason and judgment while acting as representatives in Congress. This is the delegate model of representation .
In contrast, a representative who understands their role to be that of a trustee believes they are entrusted by the constituents with the power to use good judgment to make decisions on the constituents’ behalf. In the words of the eighteenth-century British philosopher Edmund Burke, who championed the trustee model of representation , “Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests . . . [it is rather] a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole.” [2] In the modern setting, trustee representatives will look to party consensus, party leadership, powerful interests, the member’s own personal views, and national trends to better identify the voting choices they should make.
Understandably, few if any representatives adhere strictly to one model or the other. Instead, most find themselves attempting to balance the important principles embedded in each. Political scientists call this the politico model of representation . In it, members of Congress act as either trustee or delegate based on rational political calculations about who is best served, the constituency or the nation.
For example, every representative, regardless of party or conservative versus liberal leanings, must remain firm in support of some ideologies and resistant to others. On the political right, an issue that demands support might be gun rights; on the left, it might be a woman’s right to an abortion. For votes related to such issues, representatives will likely pursue a delegate approach. For other issues, especially complex questions the public at large has little patience for, such as subtle economic reforms, representatives will tend to follow a trustee approach. This is not to say their decisions on these issues run contrary to public opinion. Rather, it merely means they are not acutely aware of or cannot adequately measure the extent to which their constituents support or reject the proposals at hand. It could also mean that the issue is not salient to their constituents. Congress works on hundreds of different issues each year, and constituents are likely not aware of the particulars of most of them.
DESCRIPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS
In some cases, representation can seem to have very little to do with the substantive issues representatives in Congress tend to debate. Instead, proper representation for some is rooted in the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and sexual identity of the representatives themselves. This form of representation is called descriptive representation .
At one time, there was relatively little concern about descriptive representation in Congress. A major reason is that until well into the twentieth century, White men of European background constituted an overwhelming majority of the voting population. African Americans were routinely deprived of the opportunity to participate in democracy, and Hispanics and other minority groups were fairly insignificant in number and excluded by the states. While women in many western states could vote sooner, all women were not able to exercise their right to vote nationwide until passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920, and they began to make up more than 5 percent of either chamber only in the 1990s.
Many advances in women’s rights have been the result of women’s greater engagement in politics and representation in the halls of government, especially since the founding of the National Organization for Women in 1966 and the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) in 1971. The NWPC was formed by Bella Abzug ( Figure 11.11 ), Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, and other leading feminists to encourage women’s participation in political parties, elect women to office, and raise money for their campaigns. For example, Patsy Mink (D-HI) ( Figure 11.11 ), the first Asian American woman elected to Congress, was the coauthor of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Title IX of which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Mink had been interested in fighting discrimination in education since her youth, when she opposed racial segregation in campus housing while a student at the University of Nebraska. She went to law school after being denied admission to medical school because of her gender. Like Mink, many other women sought and won political office, many with the help of the NWPC. Today, EMILY’s List, a PAC founded in 1985 to help elect pro-choice Democratic women to office, plays a major role in fundraising for female candidates. In the 2018 midterm elections, thirty-four women endorsed by EMILY’s List won election to the U.S. House. [3] In 2020, the Republicans took a page from the Democrats’ playbook when they made the recruitment and support of quality female candidates a priority and increased the number of Republican women in the House from thirteen to twenty-eight, including ten seats formerly held by Democrats. [4]
In the wake of the Civil Rights Movement, African American representatives also began to enter Congress in increasing numbers. In 1971, to better represent their interests, these representatives founded the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), an organization that grew out of a Democratic select committee formed in 1969. Founding members of the CBC include Ralph Metcalfe (D-IL), a former sprinter from Chicago who had medaled at both the Los Angeles (1932) and Berlin (1936) Olympic Games, and Shirley Chisholm, a founder of the NWPC and the first African American woman to be elected to the House of Representatives ( Figure 11.12 ).
In recent decades, Congress has become much more descriptively representative of the United States. The 117th Congress, which began in January 2021 had a historically large percentage of racial and ethnic minorities. African Americans made up the largest percentage, with sixty-two members (including two delegates and two people who would soon resign to serve in the executive branch), while Latinos accounted for fifty-four members (including two delegates and the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico), up from thirty just a decade before. [5] Yet, demographically speaking, Congress as a whole is still a long way from where the country is and is composed of largely White wealthy men. For example, although more than half the U.S. population is female, only 25 percent of Congress is. Congress is also overwhelmingly Christian ( Figure 11.13 ).
REPRESENTING CONSTITUENTS
Ethnic, racial, gender, or ideological identity aside, it is a representative’s actions in Congress that ultimately reflect their understanding of representation. Congress members’ most important function as lawmakers is writing, supporting, and passing bills. And as representatives of their constituents, they are charged with addressing those constituents’ interests. Historically, this job has included what some have affectionately called “bringing home the bacon” but what many (usually those outside the district in question) call pork-barrel politics . As a term and a practice, pork-barrel politics—federal spending on projects designed to benefit a particular district or set of constituents—has been around since the nineteenth century, when barrels of salt pork were both a sign of wealth and a system of reward. While pork-barrel politics are often deplored during election campaigns, and earmarks—funds appropriated for specific projects—are no longer permitted in Congress (see feature box below), legislative control of local appropriations nevertheless still exists. In more formal language, allocation , or the influencing of the national budget in ways that help the district or state, can mean securing funds for a specific district’s project like an airport, or getting tax breaks for certain types of agriculture or manufacturing.
GET CONNECTED!
Language and Metaphor
The language and metaphors of war and violence are common in politics. Candidates routinely “smell blood in the water,” “battle for delegates,” go “head-to-head,” and “make heads roll.” But references to actual violence aren’t the only metaphorical devices commonly used in politics. Another is mentions of food. Powerful speakers frequently “throw red meat to the crowds”; careful politicians prefer to stick to “meat-and-potato issues”; and representatives are frequently encouraged by their constituents to “bring home the bacon.” And the way members of Congress typically “bring home the bacon” is often described with another agricultural metaphor, the “earmark.”
In ranching, an earmark is a small cut on the ear of a cow or other animal to denote ownership. Similarly, in Congress, an earmark is a mark in a bill that directs some of the bill’s funds to be spent on specific projects or for specific tax exemptions. Since the 1980s, the earmark has become a common vehicle for sending money to various projects around the country. Many a road, hospital, and airport can trace its origins back to a few skillfully drafted earmarks.
Relatively few people outside Congress had ever heard of the term before the 2008 presidential election, when Republican nominee Senator John McCain touted his career-long refusal to use the earmark as a testament to his commitment to reforming spending habits in Washington. [6] McCain’s criticism of the earmark as a form of corruption cast a shadow over a previously common legislative practice. As the country sank into recession and Congress tried to use spending bills to stimulate the economy, the public grew more acutely aware of its earmarking habits. Congresspersons then were eager to distance themselves from the practice. In fact, the use of earmarks to encourage Republicans to help pass health care reform actually made the bill less popular with the public.
In 2011, after Republicans took over the House, they outlawed earmarks. But with deadlocks and stalemates becoming more common, some quiet voices have begun asking for a return to the practice. They argue that Congress works because representatives can satisfy their responsibilities to their constituents by making deals. The earmarks are those deals. By taking them away, Congress has hampered its own ability to “bring home the bacon.”
Are earmarks a vital part of legislating or a corrupt practice that was rightly jettisoned? Pick a cause or industry, and investigate whether any earmarks ever favored it, or research the way earmarks have hurt or helped your state or district, and decide for yourself.
Follow-up activity: Find out where your congressional representative stands on the ban on earmarks and write to support or dissuade them.
Such budgetary allocations aren’t always looked upon favorably by constituents. Consider, for example, the passage of the ACA in 2010. The desire for comprehensive universal health care had been a driving position of the Democrats since at least the 1960s. During the 2008 campaign, that desire was so great among both Democrats and Republicans that both parties put forth plans. When the Democrats took control of Congress and the presidency in 2009, they quickly began putting together their plan. Soon, however, the politics grew complex, and the proposed plan became very contentious for the Republican Party.
Nevertheless, the desire to make good on a decades-old political promise compelled Democrats to do everything in their power to pass something. They offered sympathetic members of the Republican Party valuable budgetary concessions; they attempted to include allocations they hoped the opposition might feel compelled to support; and they drafted the bill in a purposely complex manner to avoid future challenges. These efforts, however, had the opposite effect. The Republican Party’s constituency interpreted the allocations as bribery and the bill as inherently flawed, and felt it should be scrapped entirely. The more Democrats dug in, the more frustrated the Republicans became ( Figure 11.14 ).
The Republican opposition, which took control of the House during the 2010 midterm elections, promised constituents they would repeal the law. Their attempts were complicated, however, by the fact that Democrats still held the Senate and the presidency. Yet, the desire to represent the interests of their constituents compelled Republicans to use another tool at their disposal, the symbolic vote. During the 112th and 113th Congresses, Republicans voted more than sixty times to either repeal or severely limit the reach of the law. They understood these efforts had little to no chance of ever making it to the president’s desk. And if they did, he would certainly have vetoed them. But it was important for these representatives to demonstrate to their constituents that they understood their wishes and were willing to act on them.
Historically, representatives have been able to balance their role as members of a national legislative body with their role as representatives of a smaller community. The Obamacare fight, however, gave a boost to the growing concern that the power structure in Washington divides representatives from the needs of their constituency. [7] This has exerted pressure on representatives to the extent that some now pursue a more straightforward delegate approach to representation. Indeed, following the 2010 election, a handful of Republicans began living in their offices in Washington, convinced that by not establishing a residence in Washington, they would appear closer to their constituents at home. [8]
COLLECTIVE REPRESENTATION AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL
The concept of collective representation describes the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole. That is, it considers whether the institution itself represents the American people, not just whether a particular member of Congress represents their district. Predictably, it is far more difficult for Congress to maintain a level of collective representation than it is for individual members of Congress to represent their own constituents. Not only is Congress a mixture of different ideologies, interests, and party affiliations, but the collective constituency of the United States has an even-greater level of diversity. Nor is it a solution to attempt to match the diversity of opinions and interests in the United States with those in Congress. Indeed, such an attempt would likely make it more difficult for Congress to maintain collective representation. Its rules and procedures require Congress to use flexibility, bargaining, and concessions. Yet, it is this flexibility and these concessions, which many now interpret as corruption, that tend to engender the high public disapproval ratings experienced by Congress.
After many years of deadlocks and bickering on Capitol Hill, the national perception of Congress has tended to run under 20 percent approval in recent years, with large majorities disapproving. Through mid-2021, the Congress, narrowly under Democratic control, was receiving higher approval ratings, above 30 percent. However, congressional approval still lags public approval of the presidency and Supreme Court by a considerable margin. In the two decades following the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s, the national approval rating of Congress hovered between 30 and 40 percent, then trended upward in the 1990s, before trending downward in the twenty-first century. [9]
Yet, incumbent reelections have remained largely unaffected. The reason has to do with the remarkable ability of many in the United States to separate their distaste for Congress from their appreciation for their own representative. Paradoxically, this tendency to hate the group but love one’s own representative actually perpetuates the problem of poor congressional approval ratings. The reason is that it blunts voters’ natural desire to replace those in power who are earning such low approval ratings.
As decades of polling indicate, few events push congressional approval ratings above 50 percent. Indeed, when the ratings are graphed, the two noticeable peaks are at 57 percent in 1998 and 84 percent in 2001 ( Figure 11.15 ). In 1998, according to Gallup polling, the rise in approval accompanied a similar rise in other mood measures, including President Bill Clinton’s approval ratings and general satisfaction with the state of the country and the economy. In 2001, approval spiked after the September 11 terrorist attacks and the Bush administration launched the “War on Terror,” sending troops first to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. War has the power to bring majorities of voters to view their Congress and president in an overwhelmingly positive way. [10]
Nevertheless, all things being equal, citizens tend to rate Congress more highly when things get done and more poorly when things do not get done. For example, during the first half of President Obama’s first term, Congress’s approval rating reached a relative high of about 40 percent. Both houses were dominated by members of the president’s own party, and many people were eager for Congress to take action to end the deep recession and begin to repair the economy. Millions were suffering economically, out of work, or losing their jobs, and the idea that Congress was busy passing large stimulus packages, working on finance reform, and grilling unpopular bank CEOs and financial titans appealed to many. Approval began to fade as the Republican Party slowed the wheels of Congress during the tumultuous debates over Obamacare and reached a low of 9 percent following the federal government shutdown in October 2013.
One of the events that began the approval rating’s downward trend was Congress’s divisive debate over national deficits. A deficit is what results when Congress spends more than it has available. It then conducts additional deficit spending by increasing the national debt. Many modern economists contend that during periods of economic decline, the nation should run deficits, because additional government spending has a stimulative effect that can help restart a sluggish economy. Despite this benefit, voters rarely appreciate deficits. They see Congress as spending wastefully during a time when they themselves are cutting costs to get by.
The disconnect between the common public perception of running a deficit and its legitimate policy goals is frequently exploited for political advantage. For example, while running for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama slammed the deficit spending of the George W. Bush presidency, saying it was “unpatriotic.” This sentiment echoed complaints Democrats had been issuing for years as a weapon against President Bush’s policies. Following the election of President Obama and the Democratic takeover of the Senate, the concern over deficit spending shifted parties, with Republicans championing a spendthrift policy as a way of resisting Democratic policies.
LINK TO LEARNING
Find your representative at the U.S. House website and then explore their website and social media accounts to see whether the issues on which your representative spends time are the ones you think are most appropriate.
CHAPTER REVIEW
See the Chapter 11.3 Review for a summary of this section, the key vocabulary , and some review questions to check your knowledge.
- Steven S. Smith. 1999. The American Congress . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. ↵
- Edmund Burke, “Speech to the Electors of Bristol,” 3 November 1774, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html (May 1, 2016). ↵
- EMILY's List, "Our History," https://www.emilyslist.org/pages/entry/our-history (June 1, 2021) ↵
- Michele L. Swers, "More Republican women than before will serve this Congress. Here's why." Washington Post , 5 January 2021. ↵
- Jennifer E. Manning, August 5 2021. "Membership of the 117th Congress: A Profile." Congressional Research Service. (https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46705) ↵
- “Statement by John McCain on Banning Earmarks,” 13 March 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=90739 (May 15, 2016); “Press Release - John McCain’s Economic Plan,” 15 April 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=94082 (May 15, 2016) ↵
- Kathleen Parker, “Health-Care Reform’s Sickeningly Sweet Deals,” The Washington Post , 10 March 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/09/AR2010030903068.html (May 1, 2016); Dana Milbank, “Sweeteners for the South,” The Washington Post , 22 November 2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102272.html (May 1, 2016); Jeffry H. Anderson, “Nebraska’s Dark-Horse Candidate and the Cornhusker Kickback,” The Weekly Standard , 4 May 2014. ↵
- Phil Hirschkorn and Wyatt Andrews, “One-Fifth of House Freshmen Sleep in Offices,” CBS News, 22 January 2011, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/one-fifth-of-house-freshmen-sleep-in-offices/ (May 1, 2016). ↵
- “Congress and the Public,” http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx (May 15, 2016). ↵
American Government (3e - Third Edition) Copyright © by OpenStax and Lumen Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
Share This Book
Congressional Representation
Learning objectives.
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Explain the basics of representation
- Describe the extent to which Congress as a body represents the U.S. population
- Explain the concept of collective representation
- Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings
The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office. In this section, we will explore three different models of representation and the concept of descriptive representation. We will look at the way members of Congress navigate the challenging terrain of representation as they serve, and all the many predictable and unpredictable consequences of the decisions they make.
TYPES OF REPRESENTATION: LOOKING OUT FOR CONSTITUENTS
By definition and title, senators and House members are representatives. This means they are intended to be drawn from local populations around the country so they can speak for and make decisions for those local populations, their constituents, while serving in their respective legislative houses. That is, representation refers to an elected leader’s looking out for his or her constituents while carrying out the duties of the office.
Steven S. Smith. 1999. The American Congress . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Theoretically, the process of constituents voting regularly and reaching out to their representatives helps these congresspersons better represent them. It is considered a given by some in representative democracies that representatives will seldom ignore the wishes of constituents, especially on salient issues that directly affect the district or state. In reality, the job of representing in Congress is often quite complicated, and elected leaders do not always know where their constituents stand. Nor do constituents always agree on everything. Navigating their sometimes contradictory demands and balancing them with the demands of the party, powerful interest groups, ideological concerns, the legislative body, their own personal beliefs, and the country as a whole can be a complicated and frustrating process for representatives.
Traditionally, representatives have seen their role as that of a delegate, a trustee, or someone attempting to balance the two. A representative who sees him- or herself as a delegate believes he or she is empowered merely to enact the wishes of constituents. Delegates must employ some means to identify the views of their constituents and then vote accordingly. They are not permitted the liberty of employing their own reason and judgment while acting as representatives in Congress. This is the delegate model of representation.
In contrast, a representative who understands their role to be that of a trustee believes he or she is entrusted by the constituents with the power to use good judgment to make decisions on the constituents’ behalf. In the words of the eighteenth-century British philosopher Edmund Burke, who championed the trustee model of representation , “Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests . . . [it is rather] a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole.”
Edmund Burke, “Speech to the Electors of Bristol,” 3 November 1774, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html (May 1, 2016).
In the modern setting, trustee representatives will look to party consensus, party leadership, powerful interests, the member’s own personal views, and national trends to better identify the voting choices they should make.
Understandably, few if any representatives adhere strictly to one model or the other. Instead, most find themselves attempting to balance the important principles embedded in each. Political scientists call this the politico model of representation . In it, members of Congress act as either trustee or delegate based on rational political calculations about who is best served, the constituency or the nation.
For example, every representative, regardless of party or conservative versus liberal leanings, must remain firm in support of some ideologies and resistant to others. On the political right, an issue that demands support might be gun rights; on the left, it might be a woman’s right to an abortion. For votes related to such issues, representatives will likely pursue a delegate approach. For other issues, especially complex questions the public at large has little patience for, such as subtle economic reforms, representatives will tend to follow a trustee approach. This is not to say their decisions on these issues run contrary to public opinion. Rather, it merely means they are not acutely aware of or cannot adequately measure the extent to which their constituents support or reject the proposals at hand. It could also mean that the issue is not salient to their constituents. Congress works on hundreds of different issues each year, and constituents are likely not aware of the particulars of most of them.
DESCRIPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS
In some cases, representation can seem to have very little to do with the substantive issues representatives in Congress tend to debate. Instead, proper representation for some is rooted in the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and sexual identity of the representatives themselves. This form of representation is called descriptive representation .
At one time, there was relatively little concern about descriptive representation in Congress. A major reason is that until well into the twentieth century, white men of European background constituted an overwhelming majority of the voting population. African Americans were routinely deprived of the opportunity to participate in democracy, and Hispanics and other minority groups were fairly insignificant in number and excluded by the states. While women in many western states could vote sooner, all women were not able to exercise their right to vote nationwide until passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920, and they began to make up more than 5 percent of either chamber only in the 1990s.
Many advances in women’s rights have been the result of women’s greater engagement in politics and representation in the halls of government, especially since the founding of the National Organization for Women in 1966 and the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) in 1971. The NWPC was formed by Bella Abzug (Figure) , Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, and other leading feminists to encourage women’s participation in political parties, elect women to office, and raise money for their campaigns. For example, Patsy Mink (D-HI) (Figure), the first Asian American woman elected to Congress, was the coauthor of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Title IX of which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Mink had been interested in fighting discrimination in education since her youth, when she opposed racial segregation in campus housing while a student at the University of Nebraska. She went to law school after being denied admission to medical school because of her gender. Like Mink, many other women sought and won political office, many with the help of the NWPC. Today, EMILY’s List, a PAC founded in 1985 to help elect pro-choice Democratic women to office, plays a major role in fundraising for female candidates. In the 2012 general election, 80 percent of the candidates endorsed by EMILY’s List won a seat.
“Claire McCaskill, Emily’s List Celebrate Women’s Wins in 2012,” 14 November 2012, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/11/claire-mccaskill-emilys-list-celebrate-womens-wins-in-2012/ (May 1, 2016).
Figure 1. Patsy Mink (a), a Japanese American from Hawaii, was the first Asian American woman elected to the House of Representatives. In her successful 1970 congressional campaign, Bella Abzug (b) declared, “This woman’s place is in the House… the House of Representatives!”
In the wake of the Civil Rights Movement , African American representatives also began to enter Congress in increasing numbers. In 1971, to better represent their interests, these representatives founded the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), an organization that grew out of a Democratic select committee formed in 1969. Founding members of the CBC include John Conyers (D-MI), currently the longest-serving member of the House of Representatives, Charles Rangel (D-NY), and Shirley Chisholm, a founder of the NWPC and the first African American woman to be elected to the House of Representatives (Figure).
Figure 2. This photo shows the founding members of the Congressional Black Caucus, which at the time of its founding in 1971 had only thirteen members. Currently, forty-six African Americans serve in Congress.
In recent decades, Congress has become much more descriptively representative of the United States. The 114th Congress, which began in January 2015, had a historically large percentage of racial and ethnic minorities. African Americans made up the largest percentage, with forty-eight members, while Latinos accounted for thirty-two members, up from nineteen just over a decade before.
Jennifer E. Manning, “Membership of the 114th Congress: A Profile,” 1 December 2015, http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%260BL*RLC2%0A (May 15, 2016); “The Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Conference,” http://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/HAIC/Historical-Essays/Strength-Numbers/Caucus-Conference/ (May 15, 2016).
Yet, demographically speaking, Congress as a whole is still a long way from where the country is and remains largely white, male, and wealthy. For example, although more than half the U.S. population is female, only 20 percent of Congress is. Congress is also overwhelmingly Christian ( [Figure] ).
Figure 3. The diversity of the country is not reflected in the U.S. Congress, whose current membership is approximately 80 percent male, 82 percent white, and 92 percent Christian.
REPRESENTING CONSTITUENTS
Ethnic, racial, gender, or ideological identity aside, it is a representative’s actions in Congress that ultimately reflect his or her understanding of representation. Congress members’ most important function as lawmakers is writing, supporting, and passing bills. And as representatives of their constituents, they are charged with addressing those constituents’ interests. Historically, this job has included what some have affectionately called “bringing home the bacon” but what many (usually those outside the district in question) call pork-barrel politics . As a term and a practice, pork-barrel politics—federal spending on projects designed to benefit a particular district or set of constituents—has been around since the nineteenth century, when barrels of salt pork were both a sign of wealth and a system of reward. While pork-barrel politics are often deplored during election campaigns, and earmarks—funds appropriated for specific projects—are no longer permitted in Congress (see feature box below), legislative control of local appropriations nevertheless still exists. In more formal language, allocation , or the influencing of the national budget in ways that help the district or state, can mean securing funds for a specific district’s project like an airport, or getting tax breaks for certain types of agriculture or manufacturing.
Language and Metaphor
The language and metaphors of war and violence are common in politics. Candidates routinely “smell blood in the water,” “battle for delegates,” go “head-to-head,” “cripple” their opponent, and “make heads roll.” But references to actual violence aren’t the only metaphorical devices commonly used in politics. Another is mentions of food. Powerful speakers frequently “throw red meat to the crowds;” careful politicians prefer to stick to “meat-and-potato issues;” and representatives are frequently encouraged by their constituents to “bring home the bacon.” And the way members of Congress typically “bring home the bacon” is often described with another agricultural metaphor, the “earmark.”
In ranching, an earmark is a small cut on the ear of a cow or other animal to denote ownership. Similarly, in Congress, an earmark is a mark in a bill that directs some of the bill’s funds to be spent on specific projects or for specific tax exemptions. Since the 1980s, the earmark has become a common vehicle for sending money to various projects around the country. Many a road, hospital, and airport can trace its origins back to a few skillfully drafted earmarks.
Relatively few people outside Congress had ever heard of the term before the 2008 presidential election, when Republican nominee Senator John McCain touted his career-long refusal to use the earmark as a testament to his commitment to reforming spending habits in Washington.
“Statement by John McCain on Banning Earmarks,” 13 March 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=90739 (May 15, 2016); “Press Release – John McCain’s Economic Plan,” 15 April 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=94082 (May 15, 2016).
McCain’s criticism of the earmark as a form of corruption cast a shadow over a previously common legislative practice. As the country sank into recession and Congress tried to use spending bills to stimulate the economy, the public grew more acutely aware of its earmarking habits. Congresspersons then were eager to distance themselves from the practice. In fact, the use of earmarks to encourage Republicans to help pass health care reform actually made the bill less popular with the public.
In 2011, after Republicans took over the House, they outlawed earmarks. But with deadlocks and stalemates becoming more common, some quiet voices have begun asking for a return to the practice. They argue that Congress works because representatives can satisfy their responsibilities to their constituents by making deals. The earmarks are those deals. By taking them away, Congress has hampered its own ability to “bring home the bacon.”
Are earmarks a vital part of legislating or a corrupt practice that was rightly jettisoned? Pick a cause or industry, and investigate whether any earmarks ever favored it, or research the way earmarks have hurt or helped your state or district, and decide for yourself.
Follow-up activity: Find out where your congressional representative stands on the ban on earmarks and write to support or dissuade him or her.
Such budgetary allocations aren’t always looked upon favorably by constituents. Consider, for example, the passage of the ACA in 2010. The desire for comprehensive universal health care had been a driving position of the Democrats since at least the 1960s. During the 2008 campaign, that desire was so great among both Democrats and Republicans that both parties put forth plans. When the Democrats took control of Congress and the presidency in 2009, they quickly began putting together their plan. Soon, however, the politics grew complex, and the proposed plan became very contentious for the Republican Party.
Nevertheless, the desire to make good on a decades-old political promise compelled Democrats to do everything in their power to pass something. They offered sympathetic members of the Republican Party valuable budgetary concessions; they attempted to include allocations they hoped the opposition might feel compelled to support; and they drafted the bill in a purposely complex manner to avoid future challenges. These efforts, however, had the opposite effect. The Republican Party’s constituency interpreted the allocations as bribery and the bill as inherently flawed, and felt it should be scrapped entirely. The more Democrats dug in, the more frustrated the Republicans became (Figure).
Figure 4. In 2009, the extended debates and legislative maneuvering in Congress over the proposed health care reform bill triggered a firestorm of disapproval from the Republicans and protests from their supporters. In many cases, hyperbole ruled the day. (credit: “dbking”/Flickr)
The Republican opposition, which took control of the House during the 2010 midterm elections, promised constituents they would repeal the law. Their attempts were complicated, however, by the fact that Democrats still held the Senate and the presidency. Yet, the desire to represent the interests of their constituents compelled Republicans to use another tool at their disposal, the symbolic vote. During the 112th and 113th Congresses, Republicans voted more than sixty times to either repeal or severely limit the reach of the law. They understood these efforts had little to no chance of ever making it to the president’s desk. And if they did, he would certainly have vetoed them. But it was important for these representatives to demonstrate to their constituents that they understood their wishes and were willing to act on them.
Historically, representatives have been able to balance their role as members of a national legislative body with their role as representatives of a smaller community. The Obamacare fight, however, gave a boost to the growing concern that the power structure in Washington divides representatives from the needs of their constituency.
Kathleen Parker, “Health-Care Reform’s Sickeningly Sweet Deals,” The Washington Post , 10 March 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/09/AR2010030903068.html (May 1, 2016); Dana Milbank, “Sweeteners for the South,” The Washington Post , 22 November 2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102272.html (May 1, 2016); Jeffry H. Anderson, “Nebraska’s Dark-Horse Candidate and the Cornhusker Kickback,” The Weekly Standard , 4 May 2014.
This has exerted pressure on representatives to the extent that some now pursue a more straightforward delegate approach to representation. Indeed, following the 2010 election, a handful of Republicans began living in their offices in Washington, convinced that by not establishing a residence in Washington, they would appear closer to their constituents at home.
Phil Hirschkorn and Wyatt Andrews, “One-Fifth of House Freshmen Sleep in Offices,” CBS News, 22 January 2011, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/one-fifth-of-house-freshmen-sleep-in-offices/ (May 1, 2016).
COLLECTIVE REPRESENTATION AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL
The concept of collective representation describes the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole. That is, it considers whether the institution itself represents the American people, not just whether a particular member of Congress represents his or her district. Predictably, it is far more difficult for Congress to maintain a level of collective representation than it is for individual members of Congress to represent their own constituents. Not only is Congress a mixture of different ideologies, interests, and party affiliations, but the collective constituency of the United States has an even-greater level of diversity. Nor is it a solution to attempt to match the diversity of opinions and interests in the United States with those in Congress. Indeed, such an attempt would likely make it more difficult for Congress to maintain collective representation. Its rules and procedures require Congress to use flexibility, bargaining, and concessions. Yet, it is this flexibility and these concessions, which many now interpret as corruption, that tend to engender the high public disapproval ratings experienced by Congress.
After many years of deadlocks and bickering on Capitol Hill, the national perception of Congress is near an all-time low. According to Gallup polls, Congress has a stunningly poor approval rating of about 16 percent. This is unusual even for a body that has rarely enjoyed a high approval rating. For example, for nearly two decades following the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s, the national approval rating of Congress hovered between 30 and 40 percent.
“Congress and the Public,” http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx (May 15, 2016).
Yet, incumbent reelections have remained largely unaffected. The reason has to do with the remarkable ability of many in the United States to separate their distaste for Congress from their appreciation for their own representative. Paradoxically, this tendency to hate the group but love one’s own representative actually perpetuates the problem of poor congressional approval ratings. The reason is that it blunts voters’ natural desire to replace those in power who are earning such low approval ratings.
As decades of polling indicate, few events push congressional approval ratings above 50 percent. Indeed, when the ratings are graphed, the two noticeable peaks are at 57 percent in 1998 and 84 percent in 2001. In 1998, according to Gallup polling, the rise in approval accompanied a similar rise in other mood measures, including President Bill Clinton ’s approval ratings and general satisfaction with the state of the country and the economy. In 2001, approval spiked after the September 11 terrorist attacks and the Bush administration launched the “War on Terror,” sending troops first to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. War has the power to bring majorities of voters to view their Congress and president in an overwhelmingly positive way.
Figure 5. Congress’s job approval rating reached a high of 84 percent in October 2001 following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It has declined fairly steadily ever since, reaching a low of 9 percent in November 2013, just after the federal government shutdown in the previous month.
Nevertheless, all things being equal, citizens tend to rate Congress more highly when things get done and more poorly when things do not get done. For example, during the first half of President Obama’s first term, Congress’s approval rating reached a relative high of about 40 percent. Both houses were dominated by members of the president’s own party, and many people were eager for Congress to take action to end the deep recession and begin to repair the economy. Millions were suffering economically, out of work, or losing their jobs, and the idea that Congress was busy passing large stimulus packages, working on finance reform, and grilling unpopular bank CEOs and financial titans appealed to many. Approval began to fade as the Republican Party slowed the wheels of Congress during the tumultuous debates over Obamacare and reached a low of 9 percent following the federal government shutdown in October 2013.
One of the events that began the approval rating’s downward trend was Congress’s divisive debate over national deficits. A deficit is what results when Congress spends more than it has available. It then conducts additional deficit spending by increasing the national debt. Many modern economists contend that during periods of economic decline, the nation should run deficits, because additional government spending has a stimulative effect that can help restart a sluggish economy. Despite this benefit, voters rarely appreciate deficits. They see Congress as spending wastefully during a time when they themselves are cutting costs to get by.
The disconnect between the common public perception of running a deficit and its legitimate policy goals is frequently exploited for political advantage. For example, while running for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama slammed the deficit spending of the George W. Bush presidency, saying it was “unpatriotic.” This sentiment echoed complaints Democrats had been issuing for years as a weapon against President Bush’s policies. Following the election of President Obama and the Democratic takeover of the Senate, the concern over deficit spending shifted parties, with Republicans championing a spendthrift policy as a way of resisting Democratic policies.
Some representatives follow the delegate model of representation, acting on the expressed wishes of their constituents, whereas others take a trustee model approach, acting on what they believe is in their constituents’ best interests. However, most representatives combine the two approaches and apply each as political circumstances demand. The standard method by which representatives have shown their fidelity to their constituents, namely “bringing home the bacon” of favorable budget allocations, has come to be interpreted as a form of corruption, or pork-barrel politics.
Representation can also be considered in other ways. Descriptive representation is the level at which Congress reflects the nation’s constituents in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and socioeconomic status. Collective representation is the extent to which the institutional body of Congress represents the population as a whole. Despite the incumbency advantage and high opinion many hold of their own legislators, Congress rarely earns an approval rating above 40 percent, and for a number of years the rating has been well below 20 percent.
A congressperson who pursued a strict delegate model of representation would seek to ________.
- legislate in the way he or she believed constituents wanted, regardless of the anticipated outcome
- legislate in a way that carefully considered the circumstances and issue so as to reach a solution that is best for everyone
- legislate in a way that is best for the nation regardless of the costs for the constituents
- legislate in the way that he or she thinks is best for the constituents
The increasing value constituents have placed on descriptive representation in Congress has had the effect of ________.
- increasing the sensitivity representatives have to their constituents demands
- decreasing the rate at which incumbents are elected
- increasing the number of minority members in Congress
- decreasing the number of majority minority districts
How has the growing interpretation of earmarks and other budget allocations as corruption influenced the way congresspersons work?
What does polling data suggest about the events that trigger exceptionally high congressional approval ratings?
Show Answer
- OpenStax American Government. Provided by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected] . License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]
Privacy Policy
Please log in to save materials. Log in
- Collective Representation
- Delegate Model of Representation
- Descriptive Representation
- Politico Model of Representation
- Pork-barrel Politics
- Representation
- Trustee Model of Representation
Congressional Representation
Learning objectives.
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Explain the basics of representation
- Describe the extent to which Congress as a body represents the U.S. population
- Explain the concept of collective representation
- Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings
The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office. In this section, we will explore three different models of representation and the concept of descriptive representation. We will look at the way members of Congress navigate the challenging terrain of representation as they serve, and all the many predictable and unpredictable consequences of the decisions they make.
TYPES OF REPRESENTATION: LOOKING OUT FOR CONSTITUENTS
By definition and title, senators and House members are representatives. This means they are intended to be drawn from local populations around the country so they can speak for and make decisions for those local populations, their constituents, while serving in their respective legislative houses. That is, representation refers to an elected leader’s looking out for his or her constituents while carrying out the duties of the office.Steven S. Smith. 1999. The American Congress . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Theoretically, the process of constituents voting regularly and reaching out to their representatives helps these congresspersons better represent them. It is considered a given by some in representative democracies that representatives will seldom ignore the wishes of constituents, especially on salient issues that directly affect the district or state. In reality, the job of representing in Congress is often quite complicated, and elected leaders do not always know where their constituents stand. Nor do constituents always agree on everything. Navigating their sometimes contradictory demands and balancing them with the demands of the party, powerful interest groups, ideological concerns, the legislative body, their own personal beliefs, and the country as a whole can be a complicated and frustrating process for representatives.
Traditionally, representatives have seen their role as that of a delegate, a trustee, or someone attempting to balance the two. A representative who sees him- or herself as a delegate believes he or she is empowered merely to enact the wishes of constituents. Delegates must employ some means to identify the views of their constituents and then vote accordingly. They are not permitted the liberty of employing their own reason and judgment while acting as representatives in Congress. This is the delegate model of representation .
In contrast, a representative who understands their role to be that of a trustee believes he or she is entrusted by the constituents with the power to use good judgment to make decisions on the constituents’ behalf. In the words of the eighteenth-century British philosopher Edmund Burke, who championed the trustee model of representation , “Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests . . . [it is rather] a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole.”Edmund Burke, “Speech to the Electors of Bristol,” 3 November 1774, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html (May 1, 2016). In the modern setting, trustee representatives will look to party consensus, party leadership, powerful interests, the member’s own personal views, and national trends to better identify the voting choices they should make.
Understandably, few if any representatives adhere strictly to one model or the other. Instead, most find themselves attempting to balance the important principles embedded in each. Political scientists call this the politico model of representation . In it, members of Congress act as either trustee or delegate based on rational political calculations about who is best served, the constituency or the nation.
For example, every representative, regardless of party or conservative versus liberal leanings, must remain firm in support of some ideologies and resistant to others. On the political right, an issue that demands support might be gun rights; on the left, it might be a woman’s right to an abortion. For votes related to such issues, representatives will likely pursue a delegate approach. For other issues, especially complex questions the public at large has little patience for, such as subtle economic reforms, representatives will tend to follow a trustee approach. This is not to say their decisions on these issues run contrary to public opinion. Rather, it merely means they are not acutely aware of or cannot adequately measure the extent to which their constituents support or reject the proposals at hand. It could also mean that the issue is not salient to their constituents. Congress works on hundreds of different issues each year, and constituents are likely not aware of the particulars of most of them.
DESCRIPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS
In some cases, representation can seem to have very little to do with the substantive issues representatives in Congress tend to debate. Instead, proper representation for some is rooted in the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and sexual identity of the representatives themselves. This form of representation is called descriptive representation .
At one time, there was relatively little concern about descriptive representation in Congress. A major reason is that until well into the twentieth century, white men of European background constituted an overwhelming majority of the voting population. African Americans were routinely deprived of the opportunity to participate in democracy, and Hispanics and other minority groups were fairly insignificant in number and excluded by the states. While women in many western states could vote sooner, all women were not able to exercise their right to vote nationwide until passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920, and they began to make up more than 5 percent of either chamber only in the 1990s.
Many advances in women’s rights have been the result of women’s greater engagement in politics and representation in the halls of government, especially since the founding of the National Organization for Women in 1966 and the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) in 1971. The NWPC was formed by Bella Abzug ( Figure ), Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, and other leading feminists to encourage women’s participation in political parties, elect women to office, and raise money for their campaigns. For example, Patsy Mink (D-HI) ( Figure ), the first Asian American woman elected to Congress, was the coauthor of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Title IX of which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Mink had been interested in fighting discrimination in education since her youth, when she opposed racial segregation in campus housing while a student at the University of Nebraska. She went to law school after being denied admission to medical school because of her gender. Like Mink, many other women sought and won political office, many with the help of the NWPC. Today, EMILY’s List, a PAC founded in 1985 to help elect pro-choice Democratic women to office, plays a major role in fundraising for female candidates. In the 2012 general election, 80 percent of the candidates endorsed by EMILY’s List won a seat.“Claire McCaskill, Emily’s List Celebrate Women’s Wins in 2012,” 14 November 2012, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/11/claire-mccaskill-emilys-list-celebrate-womens-wins-in-2012/ (May 1, 2016).
In the wake of the Civil Rights Movement , African American representatives also began to enter Congress in increasing numbers. In 1971, to better represent their interests, these representatives founded the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), an organization that grew out of a Democratic select committee formed in 1969. Founding members of the CBC include John Conyers (D-MI), currently the longest-serving member of the House of Representatives, Charles Rangel (D-NY), and Shirley Chisholm, a founder of the NWPC and the first African American woman to be elected to the House of Representatives ( Figure ).
In recent decades, Congress has become much more descriptively representative of the United States. The 114th Congress, which began in January 2015, had a historically large percentage of racial and ethnic minorities. African Americans made up the largest percentage, with forty-eight members, while Latinos accounted for thirty-two members, up from nineteen just over a decade before.Jennifer E. Manning, “Membership of the 114th Congress: A Profile,” 1 December 2015, http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%260BL*RLC2%0A (May 15, 2016); “The Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Conference,” http://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/HAIC/Historical-Essays/Strength-Numbers/Caucus-Conference/ (May 15, 2016). Yet, demographically speaking, Congress as a whole is still a long way from where the country is and remains largely white, male, and wealthy. For example, although more than half the U.S. population is female, only 20 percent of Congress is. Congress is also overwhelmingly Christian ( Figure ).
REPRESENTING CONSTITUENTS
Ethnic, racial, gender, or ideological identity aside, it is a representative’s actions in Congress that ultimately reflect his or her understanding of representation. Congress members’ most important function as lawmakers is writing, supporting, and passing bills. And as representatives of their constituents, they are charged with addressing those constituents’ interests. Historically, this job has included what some have affectionately called “bringing home the bacon” but what many (usually those outside the district in question) call pork-barrel politics . As a term and a practice, pork-barrel politics—federal spending on projects designed to benefit a particular district or set of constituents—has been around since the nineteenth century, when barrels of salt pork were both a sign of wealth and a system of reward. While pork-barrel politics are often deplored during election campaigns, and earmarks—funds appropriated for specific projects—are no longer permitted in Congress (see feature box below), legislative control of local appropriations nevertheless still exists. In more formal language, allocation , or the influencing of the national budget in ways that help the district or state, can mean securing funds for a specific district’s project like an airport, or getting tax breaks for certain types of agriculture or manufacturing.
Language and Metaphor
The language and metaphors of war and violence are common in politics. Candidates routinely “smell blood in the water,” “battle for delegates,” go “head-to-head,” “cripple” their opponent, and “make heads roll.” But references to actual violence aren’t the only metaphorical devices commonly used in politics. Another is mentions of food. Powerful speakers frequently “throw red meat to the crowds;” careful politicians prefer to stick to “meat-and-potato issues;” and representatives are frequently encouraged by their constituents to “bring home the bacon.” And the way members of Congress typically “bring home the bacon” is often described with another agricultural metaphor, the “earmark.”
In ranching, an earmark is a small cut on the ear of a cow or other animal to denote ownership. Similarly, in Congress, an earmark is a mark in a bill that directs some of the bill’s funds to be spent on specific projects or for specific tax exemptions. Since the 1980s, the earmark has become a common vehicle for sending money to various projects around the country. Many a road, hospital, and airport can trace its origins back to a few skillfully drafted earmarks.
Relatively few people outside Congress had ever heard of the term before the 2008 presidential election, when Republican nominee Senator John McCain touted his career-long refusal to use the earmark as a testament to his commitment to reforming spending habits in Washington.“Statement by John McCain on Banning Earmarks,” 13 March 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=90739 (May 15, 2016); “Press Release - John McCain’s Economic Plan,” 15 April 2008, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=94082 (May 15, 2016). McCain’s criticism of the earmark as a form of corruption cast a shadow over a previously common legislative practice. As the country sank into recession and Congress tried to use spending bills to stimulate the economy, the public grew more acutely aware of its earmarking habits. Congresspersons then were eager to distance themselves from the practice. In fact, the use of earmarks to encourage Republicans to help pass health care reform actually made the bill less popular with the public.
In 2011, after Republicans took over the House, they outlawed earmarks. But with deadlocks and stalemates becoming more common, some quiet voices have begun asking for a return to the practice. They argue that Congress works because representatives can satisfy their responsibilities to their constituents by making deals. The earmarks are those deals. By taking them away, Congress has hampered its own ability to “bring home the bacon.”
Are earmarks a vital part of legislating or a corrupt practice that was rightly jettisoned? Pick a cause or industry, and investigate whether any earmarks ever favored it, or research the way earmarks have hurt or helped your state or district, and decide for yourself.
Follow-up activity: Find out where your congressional representative stands on the ban on earmarks and write to support or dissuade him or her.
Such budgetary allocations aren’t always looked upon favorably by constituents. Consider, for example, the passage of the ACA in 2010. The desire for comprehensive universal health care had been a driving position of the Democrats since at least the 1960s. During the 2008 campaign, that desire was so great among both Democrats and Republicans that both parties put forth plans. When the Democrats took control of Congress and the presidency in 2009, they quickly began putting together their plan. Soon, however, the politics grew complex, and the proposed plan became very contentious for the Republican Party.
Nevertheless, the desire to make good on a decades-old political promise compelled Democrats to do everything in their power to pass something. They offered sympathetic members of the Republican Party valuable budgetary concessions; they attempted to include allocations they hoped the opposition might feel compelled to support; and they drafted the bill in a purposely complex manner to avoid future challenges. These efforts, however, had the opposite effect. The Republican Party’s constituency interpreted the allocations as bribery and the bill as inherently flawed, and felt it should be scrapped entirely. The more Democrats dug in, the more frustrated the Republicans became ( Figure ).
The Republican opposition, which took control of the House during the 2010 midterm elections, promised constituents they would repeal the law. Their attempts were complicated, however, by the fact that Democrats still held the Senate and the presidency. Yet, the desire to represent the interests of their constituents compelled Republicans to use another tool at their disposal, the symbolic vote. During the 112th and 113th Congresses, Republicans voted more than sixty times to either repeal or severely limit the reach of the law. They understood these efforts had little to no chance of ever making it to the president’s desk. And if they did, he would certainly have vetoed them. But it was important for these representatives to demonstrate to their constituents that they understood their wishes and were willing to act on them.
Historically, representatives have been able to balance their role as members of a national legislative body with their role as representatives of a smaller community. The Obamacare fight, however, gave a boost to the growing concern that the power structure in Washington divides representatives from the needs of their constituency.Kathleen Parker, “Health-Care Reform’s Sickeningly Sweet Deals,” The Washington Post , 10 March 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/09/AR2010030903068.html (May 1, 2016); Dana Milbank, “Sweeteners for the South,” The Washington Post , 22 November 2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102272.html (May 1, 2016); Jeffry H. Anderson, “Nebraska’s Dark-Horse Candidate and the Cornhusker Kickback,” The Weekly Standard , 4 May 2014. This has exerted pressure on representatives to the extent that some now pursue a more straightforward delegate approach to representation. Indeed, following the 2010 election, a handful of Republicans began living in their offices in Washington, convinced that by not establishing a residence in Washington, they would appear closer to their constituents at home.Phil Hirschkorn and Wyatt Andrews, “One-Fifth of House Freshmen Sleep in Offices,” CBS News, 22 January 2011, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/one-fifth-of-house-freshmen-sleep-in-offices/ (May 1, 2016).
COLLECTIVE REPRESENTATION AND CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL
The concept of collective representation describes the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole. That is, it considers whether the institution itself represents the American people, not just whether a particular member of Congress represents his or her district. Predictably, it is far more difficult for Congress to maintain a level of collective representation than it is for individual members of Congress to represent their own constituents. Not only is Congress a mixture of different ideologies, interests, and party affiliations, but the collective constituency of the United States has an even-greater level of diversity. Nor is it a solution to attempt to match the diversity of opinions and interests in the United States with those in Congress. Indeed, such an attempt would likely make it more difficult for Congress to maintain collective representation. Its rules and procedures require Congress to use flexibility, bargaining, and concessions. Yet, it is this flexibility and these concessions, which many now interpret as corruption, that tend to engender the high public disapproval ratings experienced by Congress.
After many years of deadlocks and bickering on Capitol Hill, the national perception of Congress is near an all-time low. According to Gallup polls, Congress has a stunningly poor approval rating of about 16 percent. This is unusual even for a body that has rarely enjoyed a high approval rating. For example, for nearly two decades following the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s, the national approval rating of Congress hovered between 30 and 40 percent.“Congress and the Public,” http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx (May 15, 2016).
Yet, incumbent reelections have remained largely unaffected. The reason has to do with the remarkable ability of many in the United States to separate their distaste for Congress from their appreciation for their own representative. Paradoxically, this tendency to hate the group but love one’s own representative actually perpetuates the problem of poor congressional approval ratings. The reason is that it blunts voters’ natural desire to replace those in power who are earning such low approval ratings.
As decades of polling indicate, few events push congressional approval ratings above 50 percent. Indeed, when the ratings are graphed, the two noticeable peaks are at 57 percent in 1998 and 84 percent in 2001 ( Figure ). In 1998, according to Gallup polling, the rise in approval accompanied a similar rise in other mood measures, including President Bill Clinton ’s approval ratings and general satisfaction with the state of the country and the economy. In 2001, approval spiked after the September 11 terrorist attacks and the Bush administration launched the "War on Terror," sending troops first to Afghanistan and later to Iraq. War has the power to bring majorities of voters to view their Congress and president in an overwhelmingly positive way.“Congress and the Public,” http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx (May 15, 2016).
Nevertheless, all things being equal, citizens tend to rate Congress more highly when things get done and more poorly when things do not get done. For example, during the first half of President Obama’s first term, Congress’s approval rating reached a relative high of about 40 percent. Both houses were dominated by members of the president’s own party, and many people were eager for Congress to take action to end the deep recession and begin to repair the economy. Millions were suffering economically, out of work, or losing their jobs, and the idea that Congress was busy passing large stimulus packages, working on finance reform, and grilling unpopular bank CEOs and financial titans appealed to many. Approval began to fade as the Republican Party slowed the wheels of Congress during the tumultuous debates over Obamacare and reached a low of 9 percent following the federal government shutdown in October 2013.
One of the events that began the approval rating’s downward trend was Congress’s divisive debate over national deficits. A deficit is what results when Congress spends more than it has available. It then conducts additional deficit spending by increasing the national debt. Many modern economists contend that during periods of economic decline, the nation should run deficits, because additional government spending has a stimulative effect that can help restart a sluggish economy. Despite this benefit, voters rarely appreciate deficits. They see Congress as spending wastefully during a time when they themselves are cutting costs to get by.
The disconnect between the common public perception of running a deficit and its legitimate policy goals is frequently exploited for political advantage. For example, while running for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama slammed the deficit spending of the George W. Bush presidency, saying it was “unpatriotic.” This sentiment echoed complaints Democrats had been issuing for years as a weapon against President Bush’s policies. Following the election of President Obama and the Democratic takeover of the Senate, the concern over deficit spending shifted parties, with Republicans championing a spendthrift policy as a way of resisting Democratic policies.
Find your representative at the U.S. House website and then explore his or her website and social media accounts to see whether the issues on which your representative spends time are the ones you think are most appropriate.
Some representatives follow the delegate model of representation, acting on the expressed wishes of their constituents, whereas others take a trustee model approach, acting on what they believe is in their constituents’ best interests. However, most representatives combine the two approaches and apply each as political circumstances demand. The standard method by which representatives have shown their fidelity to their constituents, namely “bringing home the bacon” of favorable budget allocations, has come to be interpreted as a form of corruption, or pork-barrel politics.
Representation can also be considered in other ways. Descriptive representation is the level at which Congress reflects the nation’s constituents in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and socioeconomic status. Collective representation is the extent to which the institutional body of Congress represents the population as a whole. Despite the incumbency advantage and high opinion many hold of their own legislators, Congress rarely earns an approval rating above 40 percent, and for a number of years the rating has been well below 20 percent.
A congressperson who pursued a strict delegate model of representation would seek to ________.
- legislate in the way he or she believed constituents wanted, regardless of the anticipated outcome
- legislate in a way that carefully considered the circumstances and issue so as to reach a solution that is best for everyone
- legislate in a way that is best for the nation regardless of the costs for the constituents
- legislate in the way that he or she thinks is best for the constituents
The increasing value constituents have placed on descriptive representation in Congress has had the effect of ________.
- increasing the sensitivity representatives have to their constituents demands
- decreasing the rate at which incumbents are elected
- increasing the number of minority members in Congress
- decreasing the number of majority minority districts
How has the growing interpretation of earmarks and other budget allocations as corruption influenced the way congresspersons work?
What does polling data suggest about the events that trigger exceptionally high congressional approval ratings?
The peaks of congressional approval ratings have each occurred when the United States began military involvements overseas. This suggests that the start of a foreign war is one of the few things that triggers a positive reevaluation of Congress.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Congressional Representation LEARNING OUTCOMES By the end of this section, you will be able to: Explain the basics of representation Describe the extent to which Congress as a body represents the U.S. population Explain the concept of collective representation Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings
By definition and title, senators and House members are representatives. This means they are intended to be drawn from local populations around the coun...
12.3 Congressional Representation. By the end of this section, you will be able to: The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept.
Explain the concept of collective representation. Describe the forces that influence congressional approval ratings. The tension between local and national politics described in the previous section is essentially a struggle between interpretations of representation. Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to ...
Roles and Duties of a Member of Congress: Brief Overview The duties carried out by a Member of Congress are understood to include representation, legislation, and constituent service and communication, as well as electoral activities. The expectations and duties of a Member of Congress are extensive, encompassing several roles that could be full-time jobs by themselves. Despite the acceptance ...
Descriptive representation is the level at which Congress reflects the nation's constituents in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and socioeconomic status. Collective representation is the extent to which the institutional body of Congress represents the population as a whole.
The Congress of the United States serves two distinct purposes that overlap: local representation to the federal government of a congressional district by representatives and a state's at-large representation to the federal government by senators.
Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office.
In representation and lawmaking, rules matter. The constitution creates both a system of representation and a process for making law through two chambers of Congress and a president. One constitutional rule determines the official constituencies of representatives and senators; another determines how members of Congress are elected and how long ...
The House is one of Congress's two chambers (the other is the U.S. Senate), and part of the federal government's legislative branch. The number of voting representatives in the House is fixed by law at no more than 435, proportionally representing the population of the 50 states. Learn About:
Descriptive and Substantive Representation in Congress: Evidence from 80,000 Congressional Inquiries A vast literature debates the efficacy of descriptive representation in legislatures.
Also referred to as a congressman or congresswoman, each representative is elected to a two-year term serving the people of a specific congressional district. The number of voting representatives in the House is fixed by law at no more than 435, proportionally representing the population of the 50 states.
Symbolic representation, or, "public gestures of a sort that create a sense of trust and support in the relationship between representative and represented" (Eulau & Karps, 1977, p. 241), reflects the cultural and non-policy-oriented connections between representatives and their constituents.
Representation Republican purists and residents of large (geographic and population) states wanted representation to be based on population within states or some other contrived district. Those from smaller (geographic and population) states or who on principle wanted to restrict the power of the people wanted representation to be based solely on the state as an individual entity. The creative ...
Why is proportional representation in the House against the law? In 1967, Congress passed a law that bans a House district from electing more than one representative.
Sort View Congress Chamber Party Members by US State or Territory . Sort View Congress Chamber Party Members by US State or Territory . Congress. Check all; 118 ... Abercrombie, Neil - Representative. State: Hawaii District: 1 Party: Democratic Served: House: 1985-1987, 1991-2011; 2. Abercrombie, Neil - Representative.
Representation is a complex concept. It can mean paying careful attention to the concerns of constituents, understanding that representatives must act as they see fit based on what they feel best for the constituency, or relying on the particular ethnic, racial, or gender diversity of those in office.
Descriptive representation is the level at which Congress reflects the nation's constituents in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and socioeconomic status. Collective representation is the extent to which the institutional body of Congress represents the population as a whole.
the relationship between Congress and the United States as a whole, and whether the institution itself represents the American people. delegate model of representation. a model of representation in which representatives feel compelled to act on the specific stated wishes of their constituents.
In this section, we will explore three different models of representation and the concept of descriptive representation. We will look at the way members of Congress navigate the challenging terrain of representation as they serve, and all the many predictable and unpredictable consequences of the decisions they make.