Whereas the racial or gender background of legislators is commonly used to interrogate the representational relationship, research located at the intersection of the two categories is infrequent.Footnote ¹ Our interviews with women in the US Congress from diverse racial backgrounds revealed (1) the significance for legislative studies of attention to race and gender, and (2) the significance for public policy and American politics broadly of the presence of women of color in legislative office. We were fortunate at the Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP) to have an opportunity to study these relationships with in-person interviews with most of the women serving in the 114th Congress (2015–2017). This research is reported in the CAWP report, Representation Matters: Women in the U.S. Congress (Dittmar et al. Reference Dittmar, Sanbonmatsu, Carroll, Walsh and Wineinger2017), and our book, A Seat at the Table: Congresswomen’s Perspectives on Why Their Presence Matters (Dittmar, Sanbonmatsu, and Carroll Reference Dittmar, Sanbonmatsu and Carroll2018).Footnote ² This article provides a few examples from our semi-structured interviews that attest to the value of scholarly attention to the ways that gender and race simultaneously shape legislators’ experiences, behavior, and influence. With the rise of women of color serving in Congress (currently 50 of the 144 total women), legislative scholars would be wise to incorporate intersectional analyses in their research agendas.Footnote ³

The women we interviewed were cognizant of the need to unpack the “women of color” category, emphasizing the ways that race and ethnicity contribute to differences in members’ personal and legislative experiences as well as representational responsibilities. Being present in the institution matters. For example, both Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA) reported the impact of being in Congress as it affects their colleagues’ understanding of racial and ethnic categories—observations that reminded us of Mansbridge’s (Reference Mansbridge1999) concept of horizontal deliberation. Women legislators also bring attention to aspects of policy discussions and debates that otherwise might go unaddressed in their absence. Representative Linda Sánchez (D-CA) shared an example of how she intervened in a debate over childcare access and affordability in a Ways and Means Committee hearing. Explaining the myopic view of some privileged white men on the committee, she pointed out the need for them to hear from individuals who have had different life experiences and familial situations. She concluded, “I feel like my role as a woman on the committee is very important because I don’t just speak for myself. I speak for many similarly situated women and if I were not there, that perspective [would be] totally absent from the debate.”

Representative Sánchez’s sense of responsibility to similarly situated women was common among the women—and, more specifically, women of color—that we interviewed, reflecting the surrogate representation that they offer to those individuals and communities living outside of their district lines. Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA) explained, “I think as a woman and as an African American, I have a duty and responsibility, in addition to representing my constituents, to represent who I am as an American and recognize that the barriers in terms of systemic and historical and structural racism and sexism still exist. And so, all of my legislative efforts really have that lens, to try to help those barriers.” Representative Lee’s lived experiences in navigating, simultaneously, those distinctive barriers are both integral to and inseparable from her approach to governing. She told us, “I bring, like other Black women bring and other women of color bring, whatever they went through and the barriers they faced, [and I’m] trying to knock down some of those to make things better for everybody.”

Many congresswomen emphasized the ways in which their personal experiences have shaped their perspectives and priorities as legislators while also being careful not to assume homogeneity in the experiences and perspectives of women of color. The interrogation of difference among women legislators of different racial backgrounds is necessary for understanding the full range of the effects of increasing women’s representation. Women legislators of different racial backgrounds might have somewhat different issue priorities. For example, Representative Robin Kelly (D-IL) noted that immigration is likely to be more salient to Latinas than to Black women in Congress, whereas the reverse may be the case with some housing and economic issues. Even within racial groups, women legislators emphasize the diversity of experience, culture, and perspective. Representative Roybal-Allard (D-CA) challenged any “cookie-cutter” approach to understanding the Latino community, noting that her perspective is distinctive as a Mexican American, whereas other Latinas in Congress have roots in Puerto Rican or Cuban communities, among others. Intragroup dynamics also reveal gender differences. For example, Representative Brenda Lawrence (D-MI) explained, “The things that we encounter as an African American woman are different from what an African American male will encounter, and so…when I talk about education of girls, I know what it feels like—the barriers that girls have and also African Americans.” Research that analyzes the role of identity in legislative institutions along singular axes risks incomplete and inaccurate conclusions that do not address the interaction of identities in shaping legislative experience and behavior.

At the same time, women in Congress can champion multiple communities simultaneously; almost all of the women we interviewed sought to represent “women” broadly. Many also spoke specifically about their unique perspectives as mothers and caregivers, creating bonds of understanding and policy prioritization across other lines of difference. When asked if they believed that women of their racial group have a somewhat different agenda than other women in their party, most women of color responded that they share priorities with other women but that they also expand agendas and/or the range of policy discussions. Representative Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ) stated about Black congresswomen: “I think that we have an expanded agenda. But, at the end of the day, it should be to eliminate any barriers of discrimination that precludes someone fulfilling their potential. I think that we recognized that we are dealing with two issues: race and gender, and that we may, we obviously see it from those perspectives.”

Party too often is absent in studies of racial politics because people of color disproportionately give their vote to one party. However, we do see evidence in our research of how party interacts with race and gender in Congress. For example, Representative Karen Bass (D-CA) noted that race is a more consequential divide within the Democratic party than gender. The Democratic women we interviewed, and particularly those in the US House of Representatives, were dismayed by the extent of partisan polarization combined with their status as the minority party; however, the effects of polarization seemed especially acute for the women of color that we interviewed. Women of color in Congress seemed to disproportionately feel the effects of anti-immigrant attitudes and threats to social welfare and healthcare spending in their communities. The shift in party control of the US House had a particular impact on the power of congresswomen of color. Since we conducted our interviews in the 114th Congress, the Democrats have regained control of the US House, putting women of color in powerful leadership positions. Two Black women and one Latina are among the six women who currently chair House committees.Footnote ⁴ As Representative Lee (D-CA) pointed out in our interview with her, “We have a lot of women and minority women running the show for Democrats.”

Meanwhile, only three women of color in Congress identified as Republicans at the time of our study—only one of whom agreed to an interview.Footnote ⁵ Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) was the first Latina elected to Congress and the only Republican woman of color to ever chair a congressional committee.Footnote ⁶ Yet, despite the fact that she ranked 10th in seniority among Republicans, she was no longer serving in a full-committee leadership position in the 114th Congress.Footnote ⁷ Unlike Democrats, House Republicans created a committee-leadership selection process that limits the power of seniority, including the implementation of six-year term limits for committee chairs and ranking members. During her time in Congress, Representative Ros-Lehtinen served four years as ranking member and only two years as chair (2011–2013) of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs before her leadership term expired. In her interview with us, Ros-Lehtinen noted the unique perspectives that she brought as both a Cuban American woman and the representative of a majority-Latino district. She viewed herself, for example, as taking a “more family-oriented” approach to immigration policy and placing greater emphasis on US–Latin American relations than many of her colleagues. These types of perspectives, which stem from the lived experiences of women of color, are more limited in the Republican Party—in terms of both numbers and institutional power—and raise questions about the way that party structure, rules, and ideology affect political representation. Research that addresses the simultaneous function and influence of interlocking identities such as race, gender, and party in legislative institutions is best suited to answer these questions.

Intersectional research in legislative studies also must address the distinction between institutional presence and power. As decades of research and practice have proven, the effects of increasing the numbers of women in legislatures depend on the power that those women have to alter policy agendas and debates as well as institutional norms and practices. Women of color continue to confront racism and sexism within the institution of Congress and from voters and constituents. However, they also have been integral in disrupting those institutional power dynamics, telling us that they refuse to tolerate the inequity that has so deeply informed their histories. In addition to assessing the proportional presence of women within parties, racial groups, and Congress overall, legislative studies must consider the variance in women legislators’ individual and institutional power.

Analyzing legislative institutions through the interlocking lenses of gender and race allows us to better interrogate the representational effects of long-standing institutional norms and practices. Although our research described in this article focused specifically on women, it also provides a framework for understanding the gendered and racialized realities that have long advantaged white men in US legislatures. Far from being neutral spaces of deliberation and policy making, US legislatures are raced-gendered institutionsFootnote ⁸ that women of color are learning to navigate and working to change. We call on scholars to continue to build on our research by delving deeper into the myriad ways that intersecting identities shape individual and collective priorities, perspectives, and policy outcomes of legislators.