Electoral Connection

Terri Sewell sponsored the Helping working families afford child care act. This is a form of position taking. She knows her district is poor and that affordable health care is a large concern of theirs. By sponsoring this bill she is telling her constituents that she is fighting for the same things they are and she holds the same values as them. She also cosponsored A bill to require the president to disclose certain information such as income, assets and liabilities. She was also position taking in this instance and trying to please her very left leaning constituency, many of which were very upset with the results of the election.
Sewell issued a press release that she hosted a tele-town hall with rural hospital administrators to get their feedback on the Affordable Health Care Act. As republicans try to repeal the act she wants to hear from her constituency to see what is working and what needs fixed within the act. She has taken aim at the rural community because the majority of the rural community is elderly and sick and Medicaid and Medicare will affect them the most. Since no action has been taken by Sewell she is just position taking at this point. She wants to show her constituents that she will listen to their feedback and work to do something about it in Washington. Her hope is to use this as a source of credit claiming and not just symbolism. This is an issue important to her poor and elderly constituents and they will feel the ramifications if she does not produce.
Sewell also demonstrated credit claiming when she issued a press release about how she re-introduced a bill that would allow small businesses to save a certain amount of money tax free. While this act may have a small impact on her constituency I think it was largely an effort to show her constituency that she can get stuff done in Washington.

When I looked up Terri Sewell's twitter the first thing that came up was a retweet about Alabama football. This was a way to advertise to constituency not only is she a member of congress but she is also just like the people she represents. She uses her twitter to advertise herself and to connect with her constituents on a different level. However, social media does not seem to be her most effective form of advertising. With only 1,300 followers it does not appear that she has reached out to very many people with twitter, but with her success and often unopposed elections she has not had to branch out and advertise to the younger people on social media. If in the future she finds herself in a more competitive race she may find social media to be more beneficial to her than it is now.She seems to spend more money and effort using her franking privilege to reach her constituents as opposed to social media. In 2015 she spent $22,018.27 on franking, and in 2016 she spent $16,789.23. Each year this was about three per cent of her total expenditures. It is interesting that she spent less money in 2016, an election year, than she did in 2015. I would assume she did not see the need to spend anymore money in 2016 once she realized she was running unopposed. She created enough name recognition in her advertising in the past that she did not need to spend anymore money.
When it comes to how much she travels from DC to her district she does not seem to spend as much compared to other members of congress. In 2015 she only 7.7% of her total spendings went to travel and in 2016 6.5%. I think this can be attributed to the fact that she is already a well known figure in her district and she finds she is contributing more to her district with her work in DC. Overall, I think Sewell, in her situation, finds more value in credit claiming than she does in advertising.