Congressional lettermarks, ideology, and member receipt of stimulus awards from the US Department of Labor

Abstract

Recent years have witnessed an increase in members’ use of lettermarks—letters written to the bureaucracy in an effort to secure federal funding for their districts. In spite of the vitriol that has been directed toward the practice, it is unclear whether lettermarks are even effective in aiding legislators’ attempts at funneling dollars toward their districts. In an effort to determine whether lettermarks “work,” we combined content analysis of letters sent by members to the Department of Labor with data on monies awarded to particular districts through the Department of Labor from the stimulus to investigate the relationship between letter writing and awards to members’ districts. We find that, conditional on ideology, lettermarking can have an effect on the likelihood that a district received stimulus money through the Department of Labor. For most legislators, though, lettermarking does not appear to be an effective device for securing federal dollars for their districts. This nuanced set of findings suggests that the bureaucracy may be sensitive to member ideology when deciding whether to fund certain projects. Given the limited time frame and scope of our data, though, we urge researchers to continue to pursue this important line of inquiry.