With thousands of policy problems, many topics never make it to the legislative agenda, despite pressure from constituents. Across the literature, there are general theories of agenda-setting, but very few scholars have rigorously investigated the unique conditions that govern access to the agenda for issues of race. To understand legislative attention to race, I argue that we must pay attention to racial minority political power and the legislative configuration. These factors determine the levels of attention to race and the type of legislation that will discuss issues of race. Through theory-informed text analysis, I track how proposed legislation in Congress and four state legislatures communicate ideas concerning race. Using this racialized language dictionary tool, my dissertation project questions: “How has legislative attention to racial issues changed over time?” My results demonstrate that legislative attention to race is increasing over time. This result is primarily driven by resolutions. Resolutions are often more symbolic legislation that does not carry the full weight of the law. In Congress, we see an increase in attention to race in both more symbolic resolutions and more substantive bills, but this legislation rarely passes. While symbolic policies about race are not meaningless, resolutions and other symbolic policies are not substitutes for impactful legislation that could influence racial inequalities. My work analyzing legislative attention to race reveals enduring questions regarding the representation and responsiveness to Black constituents.