Replication Data for Coalitional Lobbying and Intersectional Representation in American Rulemaking

Interest groups representing the marginalized regularly neglect advocacy on behalf of their most vulnerable constituents -- those with intersectional disadvantage. Yet, they claim that such advocacy is central to their missions. I argue that interest groups representing women, people of color, Native nations, and the poor strategically conduct intersectional advocacy through coalitional lobbying. I test this claim using a new dataset of co-signature patterns within public comments on proposed agency rules submitted by a set of such groups between 2004 and 2014. I find that these groups are significantly more likely to pursue intersectional advocacy in coalitions, but that coalition work, alone, does not relate to influential intersectional advocacy. Rather, it is particular coalition characteristics, including organizational diversity and financial capacity, that relate to such influence. I conclude that collaborative lobbying and variations thereof are effective tactics for mediating representational bias in interest group advocacy and promoting more pluralistic administrative policymaking.

代表边缘群体的利益集团时常忽视为其最弱势的服务对象——即遭遇交叉性劣势（intersectional disadvantage）的个体——开展维权行动，但此类利益集团却宣称，这类维权工作乃是其使命的核心要义。本研究认为，代表女性、少数族裔、原住民群体与贫困群体的利益集团，会通过联合游说（coalitional lobbying）的策略性路径开展交叉性维权行动。本研究依托一套全新的数据集对上述论点进行验证：该数据集涵盖2004至2014年间，上述利益群体就拟议的行政机构规则提交的公开评议中的联合署名模式。研究结果显示，此类群体在联合行动中开展交叉性维权的概率显著更高，但仅靠联合行动本身，并不足以催生具有影响力的交叉性维权成果。实则，唯有具备组织多样性与资金实力等特定特征的联合行动，才能与这类影响力形成显著关联。本研究最终得出结论：联合游说及其衍生形式，是缓解利益集团维权行动中代表性偏差、推动更具多元包容性的行政决策制定的有效策略。