American Indian representation and state policy
Abstract
Despite provisions in the United States Constitution and in the Constitutions of the American States guaranteeing equal access for non-majority populations to vote, seek office, and lobby government officials, a thorough understanding of how non-majority group interests are represented in public policy proposals remains underdeveloped. For example, significant challenges to policy representation remain for racial and ethnic minorities, women, and LGB populations in Congress and these challenges may be even more pronounced in the American States. Moreover, understanding what facilitates the representation of non-majority interests is central to understanding democracy. We propose to add to our understanding of how group interests are represented by conceptualising representation as the policy responsiveness of elected officials. Specifically, we measure policy responsiveness as the amount of American Indian substantive and symbolic legislation proposed and passed in state legislatures. Our findings suggest that there are more substantive American Indian pieces of legislation proposed and passed in states with larger American Indian populations, have legislative committees and executive offices in place to address Native issues, and where American Indians have contributed more to state legislative candidates. Conversely, symbolic representation of Native issues via proposed and passed legislation is greater in states with larger American Indian populations only, and appears una…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Recent studies have demonstrated that states are involved in making Indian law and policy.
“Recent studies have demonstrated that states are involved in making Indian law and policy (Boehmke and Witmer 2015;Johnson and Witmer 2020;Witmer, Johnson, and Boehmke 2014).”
From Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after<i>Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta</i> (2023) · cites this paper as Johnson and Witmer 2020
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after<i>Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta</i>
Carlson, K. M. (2023) · Publius: The Journal of Federalism · doi:10.1093/publius/pjad020 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Johnson, J., & Witmer, R.
- Affiliations
- Kennesaw State University (US)
- Creighton University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Witmer, Richard
- ORCID
- Witmer, Richard
- Venue
- Representation
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2020-02-17
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 173-193
- ISSN
- 0034-4893 (ISSN-L)
- 1749-4001
- OpenAlex
- W3006359058
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 3.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Representation (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Politics and Representation
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Indigenous Cultures and History
- Keywords
- Native American representation, state legislatures, policy responsiveness, substantive representation, symbolic representation, tribal-state relations, minority political representation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review