Representation in State Legislative Hearings: A Case Study of Oral Testimony in the Maryland State Legislature

Open meeting laws emerged as a tool intended to enhance the public’s ability to participate in the legislative process. In theory, these laws give the public more power to shape public policy and make the input process more representative than when meetings are not open to all residents. However, research on political participation, procedural equity, and the hearing process raises questions about the extent to which hearings deliver on this objective. One reason is that those who participate do not necessarily represent the public. As a result, hearings may replicate biases instead of offsetting them. We investigate this question using a novel dataset of public hearings on environmental policy during the 2021 state legislative session in the Maryland General Assembly. The data include 955 public testimonies from 513 unique witnesses. We analyze the testimony for a host of information, including the race and gender of the person testifying, if they testified on behalf of an organization such as a business, nonprofit, or government agency, and if they opposed or supported the bill. The findings suggest public hearings lack procedural equity and need more intentional approaches to facilitate input and process.