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 Sophie Shulman, WCF Communications Fellow

Earlier this week, Politics Daily released its “The Next 10 Women to Watch in Politics” list, highlighting women—other than Sarah Palin—who are likely to gain national attention in the upcoming elections. WCF-Endorsed Candidate, Terri Sewell, made the list as she campaigns for the opportunity to be the first elected Congresswoman from Alabama.

But Sewell’s impressive leadership isn’t news to us. She’s been on WCF’S list since the early days of her campaign, and we’re thrilled that she’s looking so strong heading into today’s Democratic runoff. Running in the heavily Democratic 7th district, today’s victor will likely win the general election in November. And, according to Chris Cillizza at the Fix, Sewell is the favorite to win. Indeed, Sewell was the vote leader in June’s primary, winning 36.8% of the vote. She’s also raised over seven times the amount of her opponent, Sheila Smoot.

Since her victory in June, Sewell has been collecting endorsements across the country. The Birmingham News Editorial Board recently came out in support of Sewell, arguing that:

“Sewell has the potential to be a fine, history-making congresswoman.”

She has also received campaign contributions from illustrious donors such as U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, showing Sewell’s national appeal and her proven record on progressive issues. Very early in her candidacy, Sewell also earned a ringing endorsement from women’s rights icon Lilly Ledbetter, who gained national fame for promoting pay equity in the workplace:

“Just as I was honored to support President Barack Obama for his historic election, I am happy to support Terri Sewell in her historic race to be the first woman in Alabama elected to Congress. She is best candidate to fight for the rights of all. My regret is that I can not vote for her but I can encourage others.”

These amazing women have reached out on Sewell’s behalf because they know that she’s the kind of woman we need in Congress—one who’s willing to fight for women’s issues, as she’s done throughout her legal career and in her personal life. But Sewell has also received help from Alabama’s elected officials and the people of Alabama—because she was born and raised in Selma and has shown her deep connection to her future constituents.

Here at WCF, we’re also extremely proud of Terri Sewell, and excited for her to shatter the next glass ceiling and become Alabama’s first elected Congresswoman. For months we’ve been working to help Sewell reach this point—and now’s the time for us to reach out, support Sewell, and support women everywhere.

Ever since Sarah Palin declared herself a feminist and anti-choice conservative women began winning primaries across the country, there has been a debate raging about whether these women can be considered feminists.

I’ve made my position clear. Here at WCF, we love that more women are winning races. It helps create an environment where it’s normal for powerful women to hold leadership positions on both sides of the aisle.
I’m also glad to see that these women candidates are spurring a national debate over feminism. Allan Bradley at the Harvard Political Review commented on my Huffington Post piece after being on the Laura Ingraham Show, when I called Palin’s term of “Conservative Feminism” an oxymoron. Bradley writes:

“What Bennett should have written was, ‘We congratulate the women who have won these high-profile primaries in races across the country.  We hope that their obvious and sincere commitment to women’s freedom and equality will force them to re-evaluate their pro-life views.’”

I completely agree. In fact, that’s why after the many victories in the June 8 primaries, I wrote:

“Though some of these women don’t share WCF’s views on reproductive health choices, I am encouraged. This sudden deluge of victories has forced the country to stand up and take notice of women’s political power… That said, I want to ask these candidates one question: If elected, what will you do to advance women’s rights?”

While I understand that Bradley was not trying to defend conservative women’s definition of feminism, his uninformed criticism of women’s groups that are willing to fight for equality in all aspects of life, shows a clear bias. WCF is certainly not alone in stating that feminism is about more than just women succeeding in politics or business. That may be the end goal, but those of us who have been working in this field for years know that reproductive health choices are crucial to protecting opportunities for women to thrive.

Indeed, Bradley acknowledges at the beginning of his article that the outlook for the “Year of the Woman” is not nearly as positive as the news media would have us believe. There have already been a number of losses for women in the primary, and the vast majority of candidates in the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s “Red to Blue” program are men.

Although there have been a few high-profile races in which women candidates have been victorious, the fact is that it is still incredibly difficult for women across this country. And I don’t just mean for women candidates—all women are affected by the laws passed that limit women’s freedoms. The more anti-choice, anti-woman candidates we elect—regardless of their gender, or whether they call themselves feminists—hurts American women.

Women’s groups around the country are being attacked for trying “take possession” of feminism. Actually, it was these organizations, like WCF (which has been around since 1974), that helped create and build on the concept of feminism, and are still working hard today to make that dream a reality. Feminist icon Gloria Steinem has even come out against the new conservative pseudo feminism:

“You can be a feminist who doesn’t agree with abortion, would never have an abortion, but you can’t be a feminist who says that other women can’t, and criminalizes abortion.”

Regardless of what the anti-choice movement would like to believe, feminism and reproductive rights go hand in hand. I’m excited about the women who won elections in the past month, and I hope that they keep winning. But I also hope that they will choose to use their new positions to work to help—and not limit—other women’s access to opportunities and success.

Yesterday’s primaries brought huge victories for women across the country—many who succeeded against great odds, such as Sen. Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas and victim of egregious misogyny and racism, Nikki Haley, in South Carolina.

But the biggest headline we’re still seeing is how many of yesterday’s victorious women belong to the Republican party. Winning the GOP nomination last night were Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senate in California, Meg Whitman for California Governor, and anti-establishment candidate Sharron Angle for U.S. Senate in Nevada.

Though some of these women don’t share WCF’s views on reproductive health choices, I am encouraged. This sudden deluge of victories has forced the country to stand up and take notice of women’s political power.

That said, I want to ask these candidates one question: If elected, what will you do to advance women’s rights?

Many of you prevailed in spite of the Political Establishment. Now, it is my great hope that you will use your hard-earned collective power to help us break up the Good Ol’ Boys’ Club and change the many existing harmful views against women.

It is my firm belief that we need more women in government—but it’s essential that they use their leadership to protect and empower all women in America.

That means working to turn the tide of the Establishment, which continually looks to restrict women’s freedoms across the board.

We all know how difficult it is for Republican women to defend reproductive health choices. The party’s vicious attacks against Dede Scozzafava last year were a prime example of this.

In fact, RNC member Bill Crocker said in January,

“No more Scozzafavas, please. No more Specters, please. No more Chafees, please.”

Well at WCF, we want many more Scozzafavas, please. At WCF, we constantly look for Republican candidates who do support health choices, work to provide a safe haven for those women, and find new ways to recruit pro-choice Republican women.

Moderate Republican Woman shouldn’t be a bad word. We want both parties to acknowledge that most Americans believe health choices should be left up to the individual, not the government or a politician.

So as the country lies in wait to see how many new GOP women will be elected this November, I challenge  these women to take a stand for their gender—not work against it.

Cross-posted from my account at The Huffington Post

Will 2010 go down in history as the “Anti-Year of the Woman?”

Given the track record for women candidates already this year, I would say it’s a distinct possibility. So far, we’ve seen Dede Scozzafava, Martha Coakley, Jennifer Brunner, Connie Saltonstall, Colleen Hanabusa, Elaine Marshall, and Rep. Carol Shea-Porter stunted, dismissed, and undermined by their own political parties.

These women come from both sides of the aisle, which is one of the many important points made by National Journal reporter Erin McPike in her recent piece about the struggle of female candidates.

The obstacles to women’s political success are many: lack of party support, lack of recruitment, ingrained sexism, and male-dominated leadership of both parties.

Yes, the odds stacked against women candidates seem insurmountable. However, I am proud to say that the Women’s Campaign Forum (WCF) has been addressing each of these problems since 1974–and we’re not about to give up now.

WCF is the oldest national non-partisan organization dedicated to increasing women’s political participation, at all levels of office. We support women from the very earliest stages of their political careers.

Here’s how we tackle four of the biggest problems facing women candidates:

Lack of Party Support

We know the old boys’ club is alive and well on both sides of the aisle. As each woman this year has been squeezed out or rejected by their own party, WCF has been right there by their side. We watched, many times in shock, at how the political system blatantly damaged talented female candidates.

But this is exactly why WCF exists. We aren’t about politics as usual. We don’t wait for the masses and establishment to throw their collective weight behind a woman to support her–we’re there from the very beginning.

We invest in the woman–not just the particular race she happens to be in at that time. We focus on the political careers of our candidates, seeing their individual gifts and talents.

Not bound by party politics, WCF has been able to uniquely support women in this intimate way for 36 years.

But electing women from both parties is the only way we will ever reach gender equality in our government. A non-partisan approach is essential. We will continue to look for ways to invest in women Republican candidates who support reproductive health choices to ensure that the road to women’s equal representation is paved.

Women’s Lack of Recruitment

Thanks to the brilliant research of Jennifer Lawless, we know that women are:

• 50% less likely than men to seriously consider running for office.
• 30% less likely to actually run.
• One-third less likely to view themselves as qualified to run for office.
• One-third less likely to be asked to run for office.

WCF’s She Should Run program addresses these facts head-on. We know that if women aren’t even thinking about running for office that they need to be asked–a lot. She Should Run’s easy online platform helps us encourage women across the country to consider running for office, no matter what political party they may choose.

Through She Should Run, women are asked to consider running by someone they know and trust–which often greatly impacts a woman’s decision to become a candidate.

Ingrained Sexism

Sexism remains one of the largest factors hurting women candidates. WCF has repeatedly spoken out against misogynistic remarks made about women public figures from both parties. We work with our candidates to ensure they are prepared to handle the toxic political atmosphere that has been created for women.

When the sexism was flung most recently at Sen. Olympia Snowe, Sen. Susan Collins, Martha Coakley, Rep. Betty Sutton, Sen. Mary Landrieu, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Secretary Jennifer Brunner, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, WCF and I were there speaking out and saying, “not on our watch.”

Male-Dominated Party Leadership

The list of Republican and Democratic Party leaders provided by McPike speaks for itself: Women have almost no power in their own political party. Clearly women can’t rely on anyone else but ourselves to increase our numbers in public office.

This is why WCF stresses the importance of women’s mentorship at all levels of office as well as positions of support. As was recently reported by Erika Lovley in POLITICO, women are still largely underrepresented in the offices of Congressional members. We look to help foster women helping each other during our Hill’s Got Talent and Hail to the Chiefs special programs.

We know that if we want to see real change, we must see more women at the top.

I hope that many will stand with us to work for women’s leadership at all levels of office, across the country, and from all political parties.

If we truly want to advance women’s rights, we need women who support reproductive health choices for all. If we truly want to reach gender equality in our government, we must support women on both sides of the aisle.

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.