Elections are in trouble with general low levels of interest and turnout; Jeanette Morehouse Mendez and Rebekah Herrick suggest that if candidates looked more like America does, these problems would decrease. They call these elections where candidates differ in key social demographic traits descriptive elections. They predict that races that have candidates of different race and/or gender will see higher voter turnout out, because voters will be more interested in these races and will have less alienation and indifference. In addition, they predict that voters' stereotypes/gender preferences, as well as elite behavior, can contribute to greater voter engagement. They also predict that campaigns in these elections will discuss a wider variety of issues, and the media will do likewise. They test their expectations by examining the gender mix of candidates in gubernatorial, congressional, and state legislative races. The results suggest that voters in mixed-gender and women-only elections have less alienation, less indifference, and greater interest. They also are more likely to vote. The results offer more modest evidence that campaigns and media coverage differ in these races. Thus the authors conclude that voters' gender stereotypes and preferences have a larger effect on voters' engagements in descriptive elections.

Elections are in trouble with general low levels of interest and turnout; Jeanette Morehouse Mendez and Rebekah Herrick suggest that if candidates looked more like America does, these problems would decrease. They call these elections where candidates differ in key social demographic traits descriptive elections. They predict that races that have candidates of different race and/or gender will see higher voter turnout out, because voters will be more interested in these races and will have less alienation and indifference. In addition, they predict that voters' stereotypes/gender preferences, as well as elite behavior, can contribute to greater voter engagement. They also predict that campaigns in these elections will discuss a wider variety of issues, and the media will do likewise. They test their expectations by examining the gender mix of candidates in gubernatorial, congressional, and state legislative races. The results suggest that voters in mixed-gender and women-only elections have less alienation, less indifference, and greater interest. They also are more likely to vote. The results offer more modest evidence that campaigns and media coverage differ in these races. Thus the authors conclude that voters' gender stereotypes and preferences have a larger effect on voters' engagements in descriptive elections.

Representing America looks at the critical question of how to ensure that legislators represent their constituents' interests. Using qualitative and quantitative analysis, Herrick and Fisher investigate whether professional politicians, who have prior political experience and seek to hold office as long as possible, or citizen politicians, who come from the private sector and have no prior political experience, make better representatives. They focus on key differences in representation between citizen and professional legislators elected to the Unites States House of Representatives from 1992-1998. Representing America is a valuable study for scholars and students with an interest in representative institutions and behaviors.

Representing America looks at the critical question of how to ensure that legislators represent their constituents' interests. Using qualitative and quantitative analysis, Herrick and Fisher investigate whether professional politicians, who have prior political experience and seek to hold office as long as possible, or citizen politicians, who come from the private sector and have no prior political experience, make better representatives. They focus on key differences in representation between citizen and professional legislators elected to the Unites States House of Representatives from 1992-1998. Representing America is a valuable study for scholars and students with an interest in representative institutions and behaviors.

An ethics climate of suspicion and concern about conflicts of interest exists in U.S. politics, resulting in efforts to improve ethical conduct for Congress and an infrastructure to enforce them. Herrick examines various effects of the climate and ethics standards on the House of Representatives. The reforms had a positive effect on members' behavior with few costs. The ethics rules addressed behaviors that potentially harm the legislative process and House members altered their behavior to comply with the rules. Members who violate the standards were less likely to leave Congress, although a lack of electoral competition and members' power in the chamber can insolate them from electoral defeat or forced retirement. As Herrick documents, the concern with congressional ethics increased the number of members accused of unethical behavior and consequently modestly decreased the public's approval of Congress. But, by disciplining members, the new ethics increased congressional approval. Other negative effects include encouraging ethical members to retire, modestly decreasing the number of bills passed, and preventing members accused of violating the rules from carrying out their responsibilities. As a way to understand how to further improve members' ethics, Herrick offers a model that predicts which members were likely to violate the ethics standards. Based on the findings, three recommendations are offered to improve the ethics process: improve congressional elections, create an outside commission to investigate ethics violations, and discourge false charges against members.