Women and Politics

This post was submitted by Sophie Shulman, WCF Communcations Fellow

This November, women in American politics have the opportunity to break yet another glass ceiling. According to the Center for American Women and Politics, eight states have the potential to elect their first female governor ever. 26 states have never had a female governor, and, currently, there are only six women serving as governors in the entire country. These statistics, in conjunction with women’s 17% representation in Congress, paint a dismal picture of women’s participation in the political system.

In many ways, women’s representation at the state level is actually more important than at the federal level. While Senators and Congresswomen tend to make more impressive role models, state legislators and governors often have more impact on women’s day-to-day lives. Indeed, Governor Charlie Crist’s brave decision last month to veto a bill that would require pre-abortion ultrasounds is just one example of governors providing the first line of defense for women’s rights. Here at WCF, we work to elect women up and down the ticket to ensure that state legislatures and governments are also filled with female candidates that are willing to fight for women.

But there’s another reason why we’re working to get more women into governors’ mansions. In fact, over half of the U.S. presidents elected in the 20th century were former governors. The executive and leadership experience that governors gain while serving in the highest state office is invaluable—and is seen as the path to the presidency. If we someday hope to elect a female president, we have to work today to secure female governors.

And it appears that 2011 could be a groundbreaking year for women governors. In addition to the eight states that may elect their first female governors, two of the sitting governors don’t face re-election this cycle, and another ten states have female candidates, many of which look to be likely winners in November. If elected, these women will beat the 2004 and 2006 record of nine sitting female governors.

Here at WCF, we’ve endorsed five of these outstanding women: Libby Mitchell (ME), Margaret Anderson Kelliher (MN), Diane Denish (NM), Deb Markowitz (VT), and sitting Governor Bev Purdue (NC). We’re also supporting Linda Chavez-Thompson and Yvette McGee Brown who are hoping to become Lieutenant Governors, a great stepping-stone to governor and beyond.

While we’re thrilled that so many women are taking a chance and choosing to run for office, it’s a shame that WCF cannot endorse every woman who chooses to run for governor. We’ve selected these candidates because they’ve shown their commitment to promoting women’s rights, through their political, professional, and personal lives.

It’s fantastic to see that progress is being made in state legislatures, governor’s offices and at the federal level. But perhaps we shouldn’t be so eager to celebrate the fact that women have the potential to make up—at most—24% of the nation’s governors in 2011. We’ll continue to do our best to elect our talented women candidates—but we all need to work harder to show how much we want and need more women in government.

This post was submitted by Ariana Kelly, WCF Endorsed Candidate for Maryland State Delegate

Last Tuesday was the political candidate filing deadline.  We now know there are eleven Democratic candidates running for the open Delegate seat here in Maryland’s District 16.  Two incumbents (Del. Susan Lee and Del. Bill Frick) are also running for re-election, making a total of thirteen candidates for three seats.

Interestingly, I am the only woman in the field competing for the open seat. That’s right, it’s me and ten guys.  Here in Bethesda, this is shocking.  Our community has a tremendous number of well-educated and accomplished women who would make excellent legislators.  That’s why, historically, Montgomery County has been a leader in electing women.

Unfortunately, we are no longer leaders. We have seen a significant decrease in the number of women serving in our House of Delegates in the last eight years years. Delegate Marilyn Goldwater retired after a tremendous career in 2007, the same year Nancy King was appointed to the Senate, leaving her House of Delegates seat. Beloved Delegate Jane Lawton passed away while in office in 2008, and the late Delegate Jean Cryor, a moderate Republican and woman’s rights advocate, was defeated in 2006.

Our Montgomery County House Delegation in Annapolis now has seventeen men and only seven women. In other words our delegation is now only 29% women, down from 46% (11 women) in 2002**.

I have worked in Annapolis, and seen first hand how the scarcity of elected women impacts public policy.  I know women’s voices are needed in the halls of Annapolis, and that’s one of the reasons I decided to run.

No, I don’t think you should support me simply because I am a woman. You should support me because I am a qualified woman, with extensive experience working on the issues that matter to Montgomery County families. I also have strong values, good judgment, coalition building skills, and a track record of fiscal responsibility.

But I do think everyone supporting this campaign, from volunteers to donors and voters, can also be proud that we are working to increase the representation of women in Annapolis. With our success, I hope we will also inspire little girls and grown women to jump into future races so we can rebuild a critical mass of women in Annapolis.

**These numbers do not include Delegate Karen Britto, who was recently appointed to temporarily fill the seat of Delegate Bill Bronrott.  Del. Bronrott stepped down after the legislative session to join the Obama Administration. Delegate Britto is not running for election this fall- I am running for the seat vacated by Del. Bronrott.

Crossposted from Ariana Kelly for Delegate

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 WCF Fellow, Stephanie Glover

Congratulations, New Hampshire! The Granite State was honored by the U.S. House of Representatives for becoming the first state in the country to have a majority of women in their state senate. Out of their 24 senators, 13 are women.

According to statistics by the National Conference of State Legislators, New Hampshire’s high level of female participation is definitely noteworthy. Nationwide, the numbers are low:

Only 1,788 women serve in state legislatures

Women hold only 24.2% of seats in state legislatures

The ratio of women in state legislatures has only increased by 4% in the last 15 years

Looking at overall representation in state legislatures, Colorado ranks #1 with 39% women. New Hampshire
(again at the top) is a close second with 37%. I am shocked to learn that not a single state has achieved gender parity in their legislature. South Carolina ranks at the very bottom with only 10% women in their legislature and no women in their state senate. This is simply unacceptable.

New Hampshire is blazing the trial, but we have to help move these numbers closer to 50% by asking more women to run for office. Who do you know that should run? Remind them that we need more women at all levels of government, including in our state legislatures.

Let’s give New Hampshire some company at the top.