Women and Politics

This post was submitted by Sophie Shulman, WCF Communications Fellow

Most 23-year-olds have little idea of what they would like to do with their lives. Representative Alisha Thomas Morgan, on the other hand, won her first race for the Georgia House of Representatives. In 2002, Morgan became the first African-American elected to represent Cobb County in the Georgia House, and, to this day, she is still the youngest woman in the body. Georgia, which is ranked 38th in the nation for the percentage of women in its state legislature, needs more women at all levels of government. Without leaders like Morgan securing lower elected office, there is no way that we can achieve gender parity across the board.

Today, she’ll face off in the Democratic primary—which will more than likely decide the general election in November. If she wins, this will be her fifth term in the House, allowing her to continue her leadership on minority, youth, and education issues. In fact, Morgan has shown amazing initiative, helping to create the Young Elected Officials Network, a group focused on helping young people secure public office. She has also proven her leadership abilities in education reform, heading a statewide effort to improve Georgia’s educational system.

Born and raised in Georgia, Morgan has a deep connection to the needs of Cobb County, Georgia, and women. She has received the Outstanding Young Woman Award from the Concerned Black Clergy, the Unsung Heroine award from the Anti-Defamation League, and was elected Freshman Legislator of the Year by the Georgia Legislative Black Caucus. Her advocacy for women, the environment, and social justice is evident in just a few of the organizations endorsing her: the Atlanta Stonewall Democrats, Georgia Conservation Voters, Georgia WIN List, Georgia Equality, Sierra Club, and the Women’s Campaign Forum. Morgan has also received support from the People for the American Way Action Fund, who based their endorsement on her impressive record in Georgia:

“I know that at the heart of Representative Morgan’s campaign is a commitment to ensuring that all people are protected under law.  She’s fought hard to defend a woman’s right to choose, to end discrimination against LGBT people, and to make sure working people are treated fairly on the job.  Her tenacity has made a real difference in the lives of thousands of people, and for that we should all be grateful.”

These numerous credits to her character, however, pale in comparison to the words of her daughter:

“Vote for my mommy!”

Join WCF in supporting Representative Alisha Thomas Morgan in her primary today.

This post was submitted by Sophie Shulman, WCF Communications Fellow

As a young woman working in the political world, I am often confronted by the assertion that my generation does not feel as strongly about reproductive choices as our predecessors. After all, Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, and we’ve grown up in an era in which women appear to be fully liberated.

But the truth is that my cohort is uniquely—and dramatically—affected by Roe and its aftermath. Yesterday, I had the opportunity to hear a panel of reproductive rights advocates discuss these issues at the Campus Progress National Conference. Shelby Knox, a women’s rights advocate who works to mobilize young people around the idea of “reproductive justice,” described young people as:

“The generation that has been scared away from contraception.”

She was referring to the years of systematic weakening of the rights that were identified by Roe, which have limited women’s access and knowledge about contraception and abortion. In addition to numerous laws requiring parental consent and lack of public funding, reproductive choices have been severely affected by poor sex education in schools. Knox’s personal story of growing up in a small town in Texas with abstinence-only sex education classes was made into a documentary that attempted to explain how vital comprehensive sex-ed is to reducing pregnancy (and abortion) rates, as well as sexually transmitted infections.

Another panelist, Khadine Bennett, a Staff Attorney for ACLU of Illinois, pointed out that:

“If you are in a middle-to-upper class school, you are more likely to get comprehensive sex education than if you are low-income.”

Essentially, access to information about contraceptives and reproductive health options is based now, more than ever, based on one’s socio-economic status. While this is hardly new, it upends one of the main problems that Roe attempted to address—poor women in the United States have a much greater need for affordable and safe reproductive options.

Since Roe, conservative, anti-choice organizations have been attacking the foundations of the decision, and while they have not succeeded in overturning it, yet, they have made things much more difficult for women across the country. Part of the problem is that the women who fought for Roe in the 1960s and 1970s thought that they had won—and stopped pushing for further protection of their rights. As Bennett described her work in Illinois:

“We’re countering years and years of anti-choice work. We were tired of fighting… of being in this defensive position.”

That’s why the ACLU in Illinois, and more and more women’s groups across the country are working to stop anti-choice bills—and to create proactive legislation in anticipation of the next attack. According to Elizabeth Nash, from the Guttmacher Institute, of all the reproductive health proposals adopted in the past decade, 27 have been anti-choice and only 4 protected women’s reproductive choices.

And in the past year, anti-choice conservatives have found a new battleground in which to limit women’s rights; the health care bill reminded American women that their health choices are still not totally theirs to decide. Indeed, since the passage of the bill, as Nash says:

“Anti-choice legislators at the state level have seen an opportunity to restrict abortion in insurance.”

Just as comprehensive sexual education now seems to be a luxury, anti-choice advocates are attempting to make it harder for low-income women to have access to a necessary health service. Men and women deserve to have equal coverage of their medical needs, and to have an equal opportunity to make their own health decisions.

These changes will have the most serious impact on young women—who will have to live their entire lives with these restrictions. But women of all ages have a responsibility to fight these measures in any way they can. While the debates in Congress and the Supreme Court garner the most attention, the battles for reproductive choices are often fought in state legislatures. Jordan Goldberg, from the Center for Reproductive Rights, made the argument that:

“On a day-to-day basis, when a woman tries to get an abortion, [she] is affected by the laws of her state.”

And, individuals can also have a more decisive impact at the local level. That’s why, here at WCF, we endorse women candidates at every level—because we know that it is not only a stepping stone to higher office, but also an essential arena for women’s issues.

Perhaps women my age are less aware of how their lives are affected by their access to reproductive choices—but if the anti-choice conservatives get their way, I think they will quickly realize how important these rights are. I challenge women everywhere—and of every generation—to spread this message, call their local, state, or federal representatives, or even run for office, because we can’t afford to lose these battles.

This post was submitted by Sophie Shulman, WCF Communications Fellow

Terri Sewell, WCF-Endorsed Candidate for Alabama’s 7th District, just announced new fundraising numbers that show her with a steady lead over her opponent Shelia Smoot. The numbers suggest that in May and June, Sewell raised at least $250,000 more than Smoot—confirming our opinion that Sewell is the strongest candidate to represent Alabama.

Indeed, Sewell’s story is one that reflects her deep roots in the district— growing up in Selma, Alabama, she is the daughter of a high school basketball coach and librarian. Although Sewell’s talents gave her the opportunity to attend some of the most prestigious universities in the world, she ultimately chose to return home to share her talents with the people of Alabama. As she says herself:

“I have exactly the skill set in Washington that this District needs, and the passion and desire to make sure that other have the same opportunities that I had.”

Sewell’s candidacy is so exciting because she also applies that same passion and desire to women’s rights. Her record as an Attorney shows that she is genuinely interested in the well-being and girls and women—she has worked to prevent domestic violence and has mentored young girls of color from disadvantaged backgrounds. Sewell also recognizes the importance of having women in leadership positions:

“I know that when women are at the table, issues of families and children really get decided and discussed… Just watching the health care debate, and the fact that the Stupak amendment got defeated is a very good example of how having effective women legislators in Congress makes a difference.”

And in Alabama, electing a woman to office is especially significant. Alabama is ranked 48th in the nation for the number of women in public office, and if elected, Sewell would be the first woman ever elected to Congress from the state. Shelia Smoot, Sewell’s opponent in the Democratic runoff, is also a talented African American woman who supports women’s rights, and its reassuring to know that, either way, Alabama voters are likely to make history this November. However, Sewell has proven throughout her campaign—and professional career—that she has the knowledge, skills, and courage to stand up for her constituents and her ideals.

Let’s wish Sewell the best of luck in her runoff on Tuesday, July 13, and celebrate the shattering of another glass ceiling in Alabama!

This post was submitted by Sophie Shulman, WCF Communications Fellow

One of the most valuable parts of my fellowship experience at WCF has been the opportunity to learn about the incredible women running for office all over the country. Joyce Elliott, who is running for Congress in Arkansas’s 2nd district, was named last week as one of the DCCC’s Red-to-blue candidates—making her one of only 8 women in the program. If elected, Elliott will also be the first person of color ever elected to Congress from Arkansas.

What makes her even more remarkable is that she is a female candidate who has proven her dedication to women’s rights—and her constituents. Elliott’s district is one divided between urban and rural populations in Little Rock and the surrounding areas. But Elliott, coming from a high school graduating class of 9 students and with years of experience working in Little Rock and the State Legislature has proven that she knows how to find common ground.

And that’s why she was re-elected to the State House and the State Senate, where she currently serves as Majority Leader, and why her constituents recently led her to a stunning victory in the Democratic Primary. Elliott also has the attitude necessary to the break so many glass ceilings—throughout her political career she has been told that she couldn’t win—and yet she has emerged victorious every time. She describes her motto for campaigning as:

“You think we’re not going to get anywhere? We really are.”

As a fellow at WCF, I find this perspective strikingly similar to how we approach getting more women in politics—supporting talented women, despite the odds.

And Elliott is the perfect example of why we work so hard for women candidates—she has stood up, time and again, for women’s interests. In the State Legislature, she fought for access to emergency contraception, to uphold Roe v. Wade, and passed a bill that will provide insurance coverage for birth control.

After working for years as a high school teacher, Elliott understands the importance of public education. In addition, she has worked to achieve minimum wage increases and health care coverage for an additional 8,000 children in Arkansas—all of which has been extremely significant to Arkansas families and working women.

Elliott says that her record of supporting women is what gave her great power to win her primary. Women came out in force to help her campaign—church groups, teachers associations, and female business networks all reached out to give back to Elliott. Women knocked on doors and volunteered every day.
I’m inspired by her perseverance and her insistence that the values she holds are also the issues that will benefit her constituents the most.

Joyce Elliott is exactly the kind of woman we need in the U.S. Congress because she won’t compromise her dedication to women—or to Arkansas. Women in Arkansas have already come out to support her—now it’s your turn.

As the first-time mother of an 8-month-old, I’m often concerned with making the world better for my daughter as she grows up. But every day, I also realize that I’m not in this struggle alone. Not only are there millions of moms out there trying to figure out how to balance work, a personal life, and a child (or three)—there are also millions of fathers that now have to face the same challenges.

According to CAWP,

Elected women are working to make the agenda of legislative institutions more reflective of women’s concerns stemming from their roles as caregivers in the family and in society more generally.

Fathers have many of the same concerns, especially as more families have two working parents.

In 1995, the then Women’s Campaign Research Fund (now WCF Foundation) found that:

65% of men believe we’d have a better Congress if it had more women… A majority of women legislators (unlike men) list health care, children, family, housing, environment and education as their top priorities. In 1993, when they doubled their numbers to just over 10% in Congress, women helped write and pass more laws benefiting the family than in any previous year.

It’s been over 15 years, and still only 17% of Congress is women, and families are still being left behind. Far more men today are concerned with issues like paternity leave and child care than they were in the past, and that’s why all parents need more women in government.

Help celebrate the challenges that parents today face, and recognize the contribution of fathers nationwide by telling your representatives that we need more women in government.

This post was submitted by Jean Qiao, WCF Communications Fellow

Who needs more women in government? Everyone. Women make up 51% of the U.S. population; shouldn’t the federal government reflect that population in its elected officials? Sadly the U.S. Senate consists of only 17 women senators.

With the primary season already well underway, it is evident that 2010 will be a competitive election year for women. Current New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is facing a possible challenge by former Tennessee Congressman Harold Ford Jr. in the September Democratic primary.

But will New York voters accept this out-of-state candidate, when they already rely on Gillibrand’s leadership on issues like women’s rights?

Probably not. Harold Ford Jr. has proven that his stance on choice is anything but clear. Ford claims that he is “not pro-choice” and “pro-life” and his voting record on these issues show no clarification on his views. He has consistently supported stem-cell research and opposed the global gag rule but voted “yes” twice to ban partial-birth abortions. In addition, he supports the failed abstinence-only programs.

So Gillibrand, the incumbent, who has a strong record fighting for reproductive freedoms faces a challenger who cannot seem to differentiate between the two ends of the reproductive rights spectrum? The choice is pretty clear to me.

After being appointed to fill Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s seat in the Senate early last year, Sen. Gillibrand has been nothing but a powerhouse on women’s issues. She has sponsored and voted for various legislation that helps working mothers and their families. In addition, Gillibrand has been a strong supporter for President Obama’s healthcare plan and has fought to ensure that women’s reproductive freedoms are not excluded from healthcare coverage. In December of last year, Gillibrand was amongst the many outspoken leaders against the Stupak-Pitts amendment. Gillibrand is a proven leader and is the clear choice for New York State Senate.

Leaders of many women’s organizations agree with this sentiment. WCF President/CEO Sam Bennett was recently quoted in an article in the popular online news magazine The Daily Beast saying:

“Gillibrand has been a “trailblazer” on women’s issues, and that her organization and its donors will do ‘whatever’s necessary’ to get her reelected. I was just with a donor in New York the other day who said, ‘I supported Ford when he ran in Tennessee, he has a lot of nerve coming to my state now and asking me to vote for him instead of Kirsten.’”

It is no secret that women lack representation in the U.S. government. The narrow defeat of the Nelson-Hatch Amendment in December would most definitely not have happened if it weren’t for the outspoken women representatives in Congress. Electing women such as Kirsten Gillibrand is absolutely necessary to ensure that women’s issues are a priority in the U.S. government.

The post was written by WCF Fellow, Stephanie Glover

Women stand to gain a lot from health care reform and women in Congress are leading the charge to make comprehensive health care a reality for all Americans. Responding to the Stupak amendment is a top priority for many legislators; the Stupak amendment drastically reduces the availability of reproductive health care and any law that includes such an amendment can no longer be considered comprehensive.

Not surprisingly, the women of Congress are leading the movement to oppose the Stupak amendment. Over 40 House Democrats have signed a letter to Speaker Pelosi pledging to vote against any health care bill that includes the Stupak amendment. Who’s circulating this letter? Why, yes, it is a woman. Representative Diane DeGette of Colorado. The signatories have not yet been released, but I’m willing to bet there is a high percentage of women on that list, too.  The letter states:

As Members of Congress we believe that women should have access to a full range of reproductive health care. Health care reform must not be misused as an opportunity to restrict women’s access to reproductive health services…We will not vote for a conference report that contains language that restricts women’s right to choose any further than current law.

Other leading women in the House of Representatives have echoed this sentiment. Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz “threw the down gauntlet” on MSNBC when she said she’s “confident” the amendment will not be attached to the final bill. And, she plans to work hard to make sure this is the outcome.

This amendment specifically targets health care that applies to women, so it makes sense that women are leading the opposition to it. If only there were more women in Congress, perhaps we wouldn’t have an amendment to oppose.

Hearing Representative Wasserman-Schultz say that she is confident makes me confident that the women and men in the House and Senate will do their bests to ensure that we have real, affordable, comprehensive health care reform.