A Woman in the White House
What's taking so long?
by Lory Hough
In December,
standing at the elevator of her New York City office, arms full of books
and papers, Geraldine Ferraro IOP 1988 was stopped by a woman she had
never met before. The woman, she said, wanted to thank her.
Although
it's been nearly 15 years since Ferraro made national history by becoming
the first woman in the United States to accept a major party's nomination
for the office of vice president, women, like the one she met at the elevator,
still tell her she "made a difference" in their lives. Ferraro broke barriers,
set the pace, and opened the door. In her words, it was an "incredible"
moment.
Unfortunately,
it was just that: a moment.
Ferraro and
her running mate, presidential candidate Walter Mondale, lost 49 states
to incumbents Ronald Reagan and George Bush. And despite Mondale's prediction
that "Never again will a nominee make headlines by considering a woman.
Next time headlines will be made only if women are not considered," no
woman has since come that far.
So what happened?
Why is it that, while the Ferraros of the world have blazed a trail for
women (who make up more than 50 percent of the population in the United
States), only men still occupy the Oval Office? As two-term Santa Clara,
California, Mayor
Judy Nadler S&L 1988 points out, "We've put women in space, women
have received the Nobel Peace Prize, and women have broken every barrier
possible. But we've never been able to secure a place in the country's
highest office. And it's not for lack of talent."
What is it
for lack of then? Clearly, there is no one answer to that question. Some
reasons are easier to grasp onto while others are social constructs that
have been embedded in the nation's very fabric. And, as New Jersey Governor
Christie Todd Whitman says, "Democracy is not a nice, neat process."
Which could
explain why the United States, one of the world's longest-running democracies,
has lagged behind many other countries in electing female political leaders.
Laura Liswood, vice chair of the Kennedy School's Council of Women World
Leaders, noted in The Boston Globe, "The models for women running
the show are elsewhere on the globe. More than 20 countries have had women
presidents or prime ministers." Liswood said that as she interviewed 15
of them for her book, Women World Leaders, many were disdainful
of the United States for not leading the way. "They couldn't understand,"
she wrote, "in America, of all places, why not a woman?"
Democracy
itself, says Anita Perez Ferguson, president of the National
Women's Political Caucus, a nonpartisan group that recruits women
to run for office, "may have been a deterrent up to this time. Most women
serving as heads of state in other countries have been identified with
influential families if not part of an actual aristocracy. We have watched
with great interest what happens to the political progress of women when,
in these modern times, societies change from another form of government
to democracy. I wish I could report positive results; unfortunately I
cannot."
"That's quite
valid and quite true," adds Liswood. "In other countries, the parliamentary
system makes it easier to run. Our 50+, two-party system is unfriendly
to out-of-power groups, women obviously being one of those."
Maureen "Mo"
Steinbruner MPP 1971 also agrees. President of the Washington-based Center
for National Policy, Steinbruner says, "The democratic process makes
it harder for women. This is a country that voted to maintain slavery
for a long time. Once something's embedded, it's hard to change. It's
analogous to John F. Kennedy's being Catholic."
Democracy
in action
Historically,
women have not always been watchers of the political process in the United
States. As the authors of Women, Elections and Representation
point out, although the legal and political role of women during
colonial times was not at all clear and was based mainly on birth and
property, what is clear is this: It was not until the period of the American
Revolution that newly drafted state constitutions explicitly and completely
barred women from participation in political life. New York denied women
the vote in 1777; Massachusetts followed in 1780; seven years later, women
in all states except New Jersey lost the right to vote. By 1807, the Garden
State followed suit.
When the
fifteenth amendment was passed in 1868, giving black men the right to
cast ballots, 172 women attempted to vote in New Jersey but their ballots
were ignored. Two years later, women in Utah were given back the right
to vote, only to have it taken away seven years later. It was during this
turbulent period, in 1892, that the first woman, Victoria Woodhull, attempted
a bid for the Oval Office. Unfortunately, on election day, as Ulysses
S. Grant was voted into office, Woodhull sat in a prison cell, jailed
for obscenity for using the phrase, "the red trophy of her virginity"
in an edition of her newspaper, Woodhull & Claflin's Weekly. There
are no recorded votes for her presidency.
Which is
why, says former governor of Massachusetts and onetime presidential candidate
Michael
Dukakis, we shouldn't be surprised that a woman hasn't yet been president.
"Women weren't permitted to vote until 1920," he said, referring to the
passage of the nineteenth amendment. "Interest needs to develop and the
pool needs to get bigger."
Nancy
Gruver MPA 1996, publisher of New
Moon and HUES magazines, agrees. "The pipeline is a major
issue," she said. "Women need the experience of holding elected office
and voters need the experience of being governed by women. Only the broadening
of these experiences will create a climate of support for a woman president."
According
to Rutger University's Center
for American Women and Politics, at the end of the 1998 elections,
women held only 11.8 percent of congressional seats and 25.7 percent of
statewide elective executive offices. This is a problem, say some, because
these offices often serve as the starting point for future presidents.
"The beating
you take in politics," said Shayna Englin MPP 2000, "is different than
the beating you take in other realms. It would be much easier to go through
the process of running for president if you had already gone through it
for a different political office."
For this
reason, training programs have popped up recently like the leadership
project for Republican women in New Jersey started by Todd Whitman's administration.
A six-month intensive internship that allows women to try out all parts
of government, the project, Whitman says, "gives women the skills they
need to be able to move forward, with or without the money."
Money
and recognition talk
Which comes
to fundraising — an often cited roadblock that prevents more than
20 percent of women from serving as mayors or more than 21.8 percent of
state legislative seats being filled by women — especially when they
aren't incumbents.
"Money,"
says Nadler, "is much more difficult for women to raise. They don't have
the networks that men historically do. And, from my experience, it's not
in women's nature to ask for money. Women are much more likely to do the
'bake sale' approach of many $25 donations."
Eileen Glovsky,
president of GEM List (Give Early Money), a political action committee
(PAC) in Massachusetts, agrees. To even consider running, she says, a
candidate must raise $25,000 for a state representative seat, $100,000
for a state senate seat, and $1 million for statewide office. "These are
large sums and women aren't used to asking for large sums or to writing
checks to support political candidates."
Where it
seems to hit the hardest is in the primaries. "In primaries," said Liswood,
"women have trouble being considered viable candidates and therefore have
trouble raising money. Once they get into a general election, they can
raise as much as anyone in that position. When equality hits, therefore,
is the issue. Money, in that sense, is still a gatekeeper for women in
politics."
Narrowly
defined
Not everyone,
however, believes it's just a matter of time and money before a female
president can get elected. For instance, says Amy Richards, cofounder
of the Third Wave Foundation
and columnist for the online feminist.com,
"There's a real mind block when it comes to thinking of woman as leaders.
There's a pervasive sexism in this country. Not only in American politics,
but also in the way we live. I heard people were laughing as the White
House Project ballots were handed out."
Part of that
mind block has to do with the perception of toughness. Ferraro knows this
all too well.
"I had to
prove that I was as good, if not better, than a man would be," she said.
"For men, there's a presumption of competence. For women, there's the
burden of proof. That gets exacerbated at the national level."
During her
1984 vice presidential bid, for instance, she was constantly peppered
with questions not only about her toughness, but also about her lack of
foreign policy experience. "Are you strong enough to push the button?"
asked the Kennedy School's Marvin
Kalb, then a CBS newscaster, on "Meet the Press," three days after
her first vice-presidential debate.
"We never
ask, how would a Steve Forbes deal with an international crisis?" Ferraro
pointed out. "When I ran, it was, 'is she capable of understanding missiles?
Could she push the button?' Nobody raises that with the guys. As a woman,
as the first, I was tested on every level — substance, emotional,
and physical. In fact, I traveled more than Fritz [Mondale] and more than
Bush and Reagan combined. I had to prove that physically I could."
Even women
like Madeleine Albright, the first female secretary of state in the United
States, who has done much to dispell stereotypes about women's toughness
and foreign policy acumen, gets singled out because of her gender.
"The media
still speaks about her 'femininity,'" said Englin, a former field worker
for the Massachusetts congressional campaign of John O'Connor. "She was
in the Middle East and one newspaper suggested that her female presence'
made it easier for the negotiations to go smoothly. Come on. She's the
secretary of state — a person who is intelligent and powerful."
It is the
media, say many, that play a critical role in perpetuating the myths about
women in power, or women trying to move into traditionally male power
circles. Ferraro's treatment during her 1984 bid is often cited as a prime
example.
"The Philadelphia
Inquirer went after her like a terrier," said author and Shorenstein
Fellow Martha Kumar, who has spent many years on and off since the Carter
administration in the White House Press Room observing the relationship
between the media and political officials.
One way the
media does this is to focus on women's appearance, deflecting emphasis
away from what they "do."
"Attorney
General Janet Reno," Englin pointed out, "is railed on for looking too
masculine, for not having kids, and for not being married. On the other
hand, if you're too pretty, that's also a problem and you won't be taken
seriously."
For instance,
former Congresswoman Susan Molinari (R-NY), who spent the fall semseter
as a visiting fellow in the Institute
of Politics, had an 11-paragraph story in the Washington Post
written about how she and Congresswoman Mary
Bono (R-CA) had "returned to their roots" — their dark hair colors.
Described as part of a "browning of America," the women were compared
with blondes like Hillary Rodham Clinton, described as a "stubborn and
unreconstructed blond-like-butter devotee."
"In our lifetime,
there are always going to be stories about hair, clothes, and weight,"
Molinari said of women politicians. "We're generations away from the end
of those stories."
Not everyone
believes that women are the only targets.
"I don't
care who you are," said Dukakis. "On the national level, we have a national
press corps that's manic. They'll do to female candidates what they do
to male candidates. I don't think it'll be any different."
Former Senator
Alan Simpson (R-WY), currently the director of the Kennedy School's Institute
of Politics, agrees. "The probing, the stupefying — it will be the
same for women as it's been for men." However Simpson, who has had his
own run-ins with the media, went on to predict that a female candidate
won't stand for the same "withering fires of the media."
"Men," he said, "have enough trouble with the probing and intimate questions.
Women find this more offensive and won't put up with it."
At what
price?
Money, the
media, the stereotypes, the democratic process — barriers that many
agree make it harder for female candidates to compete fairly on the po-litical
ballfield. What's unclear, however, is how big a factor the "price tag"
of running for office has been and will continue to be in the game. Although
men and women make sacrifices, many believe that women make more when
they choose to have a career in politics.
"The personal
sacrifice that anyone has to make to seek the presidency is a huge barrier,"
says New Moon's Gruver. "For women, it might require that she forego
being a mother because that takes so much time at the same stage of life
that she needs to be paying her political dues."
Some, like
Ferraro, wait until the children are older. Others, like Massachusetts
Lieutenant Governor
Jane Swift, decide not to put off motherhood — and pay a price.
Although Swift was ultimately elected to office in 1998, during her bid,
she was constantly lambasted on radio talk shows and in the public for
running while pregnant. The news of her pregnancy made national headlines.
Many wondered how effective she would be with a newborn. No one ever questioned
her counter opponent, democrat Warren Tolman, whose wife was also pregnant
during the campaign.
"Times have
changed," adds Nadler, "but women are still considered most responsible
for home and hearth. When I first ran for city council in 1985, my daughter
was a year old. When I went door-to-door, they asked, How can you be
on the city council with a child?' It's seen as okay when kids are older,
but not during the formative years."
The next
phase
So what's
a woman to do? First and foremost, says Barbara Lee of The White House
Project, we need to start asking women to run. Which is why Lee, Liswood,
and Marie Wilson (who developed the idea for Take Your Daughter to Work
day) were inspired to start The White House Project last June. Dedicated
to increasing public awareness and acceptance of women's leadership, the
project distributed "ballots" to voters last fall, complete with the names
of 20 women. Rodham Clinton topped the polls, along with Elizabeth Dole
and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
To date,
in addition to Woodhull in 1892, only two other women have attempted the
Oval Office: Margaret Smith Chase in 1964, and Shirley Chisholm in 1972.
That could
change. In January, Dole stepped down from her role as president of the
American Red Cross, leading many to believe that she would toss her hat
into the arena for the 2000 election. The time, say some, is ripe. With
a political climate rife with scandal and frustration, the "underdog"
may be viewed as a welcome change.
"The public
is generally ready for all sort of things," says Michael Rothman MPP 2000,
"as long as they're presented to them in the right way. Was the Republican
Party 'ready' for a black man to run for president? Right up until the
day Colin Powell rumors started, they weren't. Come up with a woman who
has the bill and recognition to start Powell-like rumors in the press,
and you'll have a legitimate, potential candidate."
Predicting
that the first female elected to the White House will first be as vice
president, Todd Whitman — often cited as a potential candidate —
believes that once a qualified woman runs and succeeds, the door will
be wide open for other women.
"It'll be much more accepted," she said. "It'll be all over."
