Values and Science: Exploring Congressional Attention to Women's Health

Women's health advocates successfully lobbied for many federal health policy changes, including increased participation in clinical trials, more funding for research and health promotion for important diseases, and improved access to medical treatments. The roles of politicians and patients in the women's health movement during the last fifteen years are well documented. Less is known, however, about how issues related to gender discrimination, social values, and science have shaped these women's health policies. Does the framing of these issues affect Congressional debate?

Congress has several mechanisms to monitor federal agency performance, including Congressional committee hearings. Agency staff, outside experts, and advocates are invited to provide information for members of Congress about current and proposed policies. This paper explores the politics of women's health by examining the role of information in these hearings. Do members of Congress respond differently to anecdotal evidence or research evidence? Does reliance on value-based assessments or expert opinions depend on the type of issue (for example, abortion versus cancer?) Has Congress changed its preferences for advocate or scientific expert testimony over time?

This study utilizes a new dataset that includes measures of disagreement between panelists and members of Congress during hearings, classifications of women's health concerns, political factors such as member characteristics and partisanship, and media attention from the 1990s to the present. The findings from this study improve our understanding of how women's health advocates and their allies in Congress have been able to compel significant changes in federal policy.