Representation and Rights: The Impact of LGBT Legislators in Comparative Perspective

Abstract

This article focuses on the link between the representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in national legislatures and the existence of equality laws focused on sexual orientation. It addresses three interrelated questions: how many “out” LGBT legislators have served in national parliaments, what explains the cross-national variation in their legislative presence, and what is the relationship between the presence of gay legislators and the enactment of laws that treat gay and straight citizens equally? There is an established literature arguing that the representation of women and ethnic minorities “descriptively” in national legislatures improves the realization of their policy preferences and the position of the group within the society as a whole. This article draws on that literature and extends the analysis to LGBT communities. It finds that the presence of even a small number of openly gay legislators is associated significantly with the future passage of enhanced gay rights, even after including controls for social values, democracy, government ideology, and electoral system design. Once openly gay legislators are in office they have a transformative effect on the views and voting behavior of their straight colleagues. This “familiarity through presence” effect is echoed in studies of U.S. state legislatures and levels of social tolerance of homosexuality in the population at large.

The Influence of Women Legislators on State Health Care Spending for the Poor

“…Moreover, research has not resulted in consistent findings, leading some to question if the effect is theoretically sound (see for instance [28]). Some argue, for instance, that when underrepresented minorities are "new" (Beckwith [52] defines newness as a large increase over a short period of time resulting in greater visibility) they can be more influential than one would expect based upon their absolute numbers (see for instance [11,53]). …”

Growing numbers, growing influence? A comparative study of policy congruence between parliaments and citizens of immigrant origin

“…3 A different although related question is whether and when the efforts of MPs belonging to traditionally excluded groups to promote group interests succeed and lead to changing policy positions of the majority of legislators (Young 2000: 134;Childs 2006: 9;Franceschet & Piscopo 2008). Group belonging therefore enables legislators to act as educators, who understand the special interests of their kin and in return communicate these interests to the majority (Haider-Markel 2007;Reynolds 2013). Researchers focusing on other excluded groups hypothesise that belonging representatives provide additional information about their groups' policy preferences and act as vocal and credible advocates for these interests.…”

“…1 As a consequence of these developments, it would be reasonable to expect that parliaments respond more accurately to the policy preferences of citizens of immigrant descent. Majority MPs hear new arguments, understand why these issues matter to the groups and revise their point of view accordingly (Williams 1998;Mansbridge 1999;Haider-Markel 2007;Reynolds 2013). However, real world examples provide grounds to question the universality of the relationship: Despite increasing proportions of MPs (members of parliaments) of foreign descent, the Netherlands cut the labour market mobility programme for immigrant citizens (Banting & Kymlicka 2016a), while the United Kingdom restricted family reunification policies (Banting & Kymlicka 2016b).…”

Differential Responsiveness in Europe: The Effects of Preference Difference and Electoral Participation

“…Bartels 2008;Gilens 2005Gilens , 2012. Although recent studies broaden this focus to Germany (Fortin-Rittberger and Eder 2013), Switzerland (Rosset 2013), and larger sets of countries (Reynolds 2013;Rosset et al 2013), unequal responsiveness has scarcely been investigated in the European context. Moreover, for now, there is only little known about the possible causes for differential responsiveness.…”