Women and Politics

This post was submitted by Rebecca Freedholm, WCF Communications Fellow

Krystal Ball, the Democratic Congressional nominee in Virginia’s 1st district, recently released a brilliant video that functions as a witty commentary on Congressman Rob Wittman’s lack of accessibility. The video, entitled “On the Road With Rob,” features Ball toting a cardboard cutout of her opponent around the district to stand in his place since he has been so unresponsive to constituents.

“After numerous complaints that your congressman refuses to answer your emails, answer your calls or show up to explain his votes, we decided to bring Rob on the road so people across the 1st District of Virginia would finally have a chance to have their representative listen to there concerns.”

The video not only succeeds in humorously highlighting Wittman’s detachment from the people he represents, but also demonstrates Ball’s own approachable nature. Ball is a young, progressive, and accessible candidate who cares about connecting to her constituents.

Ball runs under the slogan, “a fresh voice from Virginia,” and that is certainly what she is. If elected, Ball will be the first woman to represent Virginia in both the House and the Senate. She will also be the youngest woman ever to serve on the United States Congress.

As a young, progressive candidate, Ball could make a significant difference in a district that has not elected a Democrat since 1977. Despite the district’s tendency to vote for Republican candidates, it is still considered a relative swing state since it includes parts of both northern and southern Virginia (areas that have discordant political views). Ball remains positive about her chances, maintaining that “the people here are getting past the D and the R and they really value someone who can think for herself.”

Ball has a reason to be optimistic. For a newcomer, her fundraising efforts have been extremely impressive. Her campaign has “put up big numbers,” and even more remarkable are the unique techniques she’s used to achieve these numbers. As part of her fundraising strategy, the campaign concocted the Krystal Ball Student Loan Challenge, in which she promised up to $50,000 to pay off the school loans of the young person who raised the most money for her campaign.

Ball is eager to connect with her constituents, and is committed to serving the people of the community she hopes to represent. As a young mother, Ball has an incentive for improving the education and healthcare systems and strives to shape a better future for the next generation. She is also dedicated to women’s issues and seeks to create a future where her “daughter has equal representation in our society.”

Krystal Ball presents a challenge to removed, unresponsive incumbent Rob Wittman. She is devoted to the people of Virginia, and looks forward to actively representing them in Congress:

“When our founding fathers first dreamed of this nation, they did not imagine a Congress filled with career politicians, marching their way up the seniority ladder. They imagined citizen servants taking time from their lives to devote to their fellow citizens in the service of this country. I believe in that tradition and I pledge to make you a part of our government again.”

A woman can either be a prude or promiscuous. Too pretty or too masculine. A shrew or a doormat. As women try to tip-toe somewhere in the middle, we find that one small move can send us plunging straight into one of the extremes.

And of course, politics is not free of these dichotomies: Sarah Palin is hot. Hillary is mean. Martha Coakley is a Jezebel.

But lately I’ve noticed a new double standard arising: Women candidates either have too much money or not enough.

Let’s look at two different races: Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner running for U.S. Congress and Linda McMahon running for Senate in Connecticut.

From the beginning, Jennifer Brunner has been told she shouldn’t run for Senate because she’s such a good Secretary of State. They need her there. This is one of the most classically lame “reasons” given to women as to why they shouldn’t run for higher office.

On top of that, she’s now being assaulted by her own party about her fundraising. Bob Menendez of the DSCC is threatening not to support her until she raises more money—despite the fact that many are saying she’s the only hope for a Democratic win (Lee Fisher reportedly lost his last two campaigns, despite outraising his opponent).

Unfortunately, we all know that fundraising is a necessary component of political campaigns. (That’s a whole different rant for a different day). However, I have to ask—would Menendez be pulling support from the more viable male candidate who wasn’t raising as much as his less-viable opponent?

Now let’s look at Linda McMahon. The former chief executive of WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment), she apparently has too much money. Though hundreds of male candidates have self-funded their way to elected office, McMahon is being accused of trying to buy the seat.

Again, all personal feelings about campaign financing aside, I have to say that it’s nice to finally see a successful woman using her wealth to run for office. Men have been doing it for decades, so for better or for worse, seeing a woman have that same ability gives me some sense of satisfaction.

But I do wonder what kind of double standard women in politics will face next. I’m sure 2010 will unfold some new gems for us, as well as reignite some old classics.