Women and Politics

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.

Written by WCF Fellow Kayla

What’s the answer we get from male Congressmen about the importance of health care reform to women? “I object.”

This past Saturday, members of the House Democratic Woman’s Caucus took the floor to speak out in favor of the health care bill because of its benefits for women.

They were greeted with nothing but bullying. Or, as ThinkProgress puts it, “Screams, Shouts, And Delay Tactics.”

Congresswoman after Congresswoman stood at the podium demanding health care for the sake of reproductive health choices for women. Again and again, Republicans interrupted every member of the women’s caucus—objecting over and over to their plea for health care for women.

Eventually it got to the point where none of the members of the women’s caucus could speak because they were interrupted so frequently and treated so unfairly.

These attacks on members of the female caucus demonstrate why we so desperately need women in office. We need women to stand up for women’s rights and stand up for women’s reproductive health choices.

We need women to be elected to Congress so they can stand up together against abusive men in the House and demand equal rights. Because apparently, it takes a woman to stand up for women’s rights.

It seems that Dede Scozzafava’s party is failing her. Word came today of even more Republicans jumping ship to back Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman in the NY-23 special election.

At first, I had hope. The list of people backing Hoffman wasn’t exactly current party leadership: Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Former New York Gov. George Pataki, Former House majority leader Dick Armey, Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

However, now we hear that National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman (NRCC) Pete Sessions is jumping ship on Dede, too. Sessions told POLITICO he would welcome Hoffman “with open arms.”

So now, thanks to those who don’t feel that the Republican Party should embrace ideals such as women’s rights, Hoffman is rising in the polls, and the GOP is afraid of losing the Republican seat.

To those who abandoned their own candidate, I have to ask: What if you stood in defense of Dede instead of caving to outside pressure? What would the outcome be if her party actually supported her properly?

Is this how all Republican female candidates should expect to be treated—left in the dust when faced with opposition? Abandoned for standing up against sexual abuse? Cast aside to endorse a candidate who drags the party backward?

Shame on you for deserting your own candidate, and double shame on you for deserting a strong female candidate, who you so desperately need for your party’s future.

Click here to support Dede today.

Of the total women (90) currently serving in Congress, less than a quarter (21) are Republican. Why?

Let’s look at the case of Dede Scozzafava, WCF-endorsed candidate. She was picked by the Republican party to run in a special election for Congress in NY-23—despite her support of reproductive health choices and gay rights.

However, the vocal fringe of the GOP has descended upon upstate New York to so vehemently oppose her election that they publicly admit they would rather the Democratic candidate win than Dede. They’re now promoting accountant Doug Hoffman, who is running on the state’s Conservative Party line.

These folks (Sarah Palin among them) say Dede doesn’t embrace the ideals of the Republican party. But as David Brooks points out in the New York Times, her voting record is pretty middle of the road:

“Her voting record puts her almost exactly in the middle of legislators nationwide. That means she’s a moderate, though slightly right of center in the context of New York. So do the conservative honchos welcome somebody in the middle of the spectrum? No.”

Dede has a strong record of defending women’s rights, from sexual abuse to domestic violence. Are these issues “too moderate” for the Republican party? They weren’t too moderate to prevent her from being their candidate. And let’s keep in mind that the majority of voters support people’s ability to make their own life decisions about reproductive health.

I argue that women like Dede embody what should be the future of the Republican party: Not out of touch with mainstream ideals and supportive of women’s rights.

A moderate female Republican candidate shouldn’t have to experience what Dede and so many others have. As a nonpartisan organization, WCF fully stands behind Dede and looks to endorse female Republican candidates who advocate for women’s rights, including reproductive health choices.

I sincerely hope that the minority opposition won’t outweigh the true voice of NY-23 and deny them of such a qualified and talented woman leader.

Click here and support Dede today.

This post was submitted by Jamie Bence, one of WCF’s Summer 2009 Fellows.

When Hillary Clinton became the nation’s third female Secretary of State, she brought a strong background in women’s rights and reproductive justice to her job.  More than any of her predecessors, Clinton imbues her work with a sense of how reproductive rights and global security are connected.

Secretary Clinton has been a well-recognized advocate of the global women’s rights movement since her historic speech at the 1995 United Nations Conference on Women in Beijing.  There, Clinton famously declared: “Women’s rights are human rights, once and for all.”

Women and girls are still the majority of the world’s poor, unschooled, unhealthy, and underfed.  Thus, it is still vitally important that women have access to the knowledge and resources that allow them to plan their families.  Nations which respect women’s rights to contraception and female health care are more likely to be progressive partners in Democracy.  According to the United Nations, gender equality is an important indicator of national stability.

It seems that Secretary Clinton’s preeminence on this issue may be inspiring change in Washington, which has long been stagnant on international women’s issues.  Shortly after Congress convened in January, Senator Barbara Boxer announced that she would be heading the first ever Senate Subcommittee on Global Women’s Issues.  In March, the White House Council on Women and Girls (led by Valerie Jarrett) was created to study gender implications of federal initiatives.  The International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act is making its way through Congress, and another, the International Violence Against Women Act, will likely be brought to a vote in the next session.

The United States can act in consort with the United Nations to improve the station of women around the world.  Though both have acknowledged that rape has been used as a tool of war, there has never been a trial in any U.N. court for committing or allowing rape as a war crime.

However, the United States could gain credibility by ratifying CEDAW, the Convention on Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women.  Besides the United States, the only other countries that have refused to ratify CEDAW are Sudan, Somalia, Iran, and a few Pacific Island states.  Moving forward, Secretary Clinton has much she can do to make the U.S. a leader in ensuring women’s rights around the world.

Hopefully, she will have continued, expanded support in the White House and Congress to accomplish her task.

For more information on Secretary Clinton’s weekend trip to Mumbai and what she said to students there about women in the world, click here.