Why
Not Elizabeth Dole?
by
Amelia Richards and Jennifer Baumgardner
*This
piece was originally published in The
Nation.
With an exploratory committee in place,
Elizabeth Dole looks like she might be the
first viable female candidate for President.
Last month, she was named in Parade
magazine as a winner in the Ms.
Foundation’s White House Project Ballot
Box Initiative, a campaign designed to raise
visibility of female leaders, brought to
you by the creators of Take Our Daughters
to Work Day.
Before feminists start dancing in the streets,
it’s worth remembering the Margaret Thatcher
law: a tough broad can lead a big developed
country and do absolutely nothing to improve
the status of women or children. Thatcher
began and ended her tenure with the same
number of female MPs, welfare was slashed
as were anti-discrimination laws, and she
even cut the free milk program for public
school children. The only women she paved
the way for were the Spice Girls.
Although Thatcher did not distinguish herself
as a feminist, she was one of a mere twenty-four
female world leaders, according to Laura
Lisswood of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School
of Goverment and vice chairman of the Council
of Women World Leaders. Lisswood traveled
the world to interview these rare birds
and returned home to report that the United
States ranks thirty-ninth (out of 160 nations)
in representation of women in elected positions.
With this ammunition, Lisswood, together
with Ms. Foundation president Marie Wilson
and philanthropist Barbara Lee, created
the White House Project. The three hoped
to raise awareness around women's leadership
and plow the way to the White House. But
a funny thing happened on the way to Washington
- feminist consciousness stayed home.
"We
had to protect this project from the radical
right," says Marie Wilson, and they feared
that use of the "F" word could marginalize
issues at the top of the national agenda
for women. "We chose a strategy that actually
bet on democracy," says Wilson. "That actually
bet on people believing in the issues [feminists]
have carried-how we educate our children,
health care for young and old, and social
security."
Yet in publicizing their ballot box initiative,
the organizers eschewed grassroots activist
networks (including Fund
for a Feminist Majority and NOW),
focusing instead on glossy mainstream media
outlets. The magazines Jane, Parade, People,
Latina and Glamour circulated a presidential
ballot featuring twenty women identified
by a group of scholars as being commander-in-chief
material. Some candidates you might expect
- Hillary Clinton, Christine Todd Whitman,
and Elizabeth Dole. Others you might not:
Mae Jameson, Angela Oh, Claudia Kennedy,
and Judith Rodin. The obscurity of some
was heightened by the fact that they were
only identified by name, job title, and
snapshot. Readers learned that Claudia Kennedy
is a three-star general in the U.S. Army
but not whether she supports abortions for
service women. "In choosing women for the
ballot, we looked at leadership skills and
a record of accomplishment," read the project's
speaking points, "not positions on specific
issues" - ignoring the fact that even Miss
America contestants are required to have
platforms. "It's not about politics, it's
about women's leadership," the press release
proclaimed. Thus, gender was the only thing
the "voters" needed to know in order to
cast their ballot for their favorite woman.
Certainly, having as many women as men in
office is one goal of feminism. However,
the idea of a women’s movement heavy on
visibility and lite on politics at this
stage of the game is depressing - just the
same old boys’ network with a couple of
coiffed red herrings in power suits.
Thus the White House Project illustrates
a dilemma in modern feminism. There are
those who believe that any woman who breaks
the glass ceiling is inherently good for
those trying to peel themselves off of the
sticky floor. On the other side stand those
who believe anyone we support for elective
office should be pro-feminist - as in pro-choice,
pro-welfare rights, pro-subsidized daycare,
etc. A related dilemma involves the images
women leaders choose to cultivate. Celinda
Lake, a Washington-based Democratic pollster
associated with the White House Project,
argued that 1998 was a good year for women
to win office, because the main issues were
family values, the home, morality and trust.
After all, aren't all women trustworthy
homemakers with impeccable virtue?
But women can't ride this antiquated stereotype
and at the same time fight it. Now that
Elizabeth Dole is on her way to running,
feminists have got to start struggling with
the inherent conflict of voting for a woman
with politics antithetical to feminism.
The truth is that women do care about issues
and they vote for candidates who are most
likely to represent their values. Clinton
is the first President who was elected with
significant help from women. They chose
him because of his stand on choice, his
proposed national system of healthcare,
his support of the Violence Against Women
Act, and the Family Medical Leave Act -
while subsequently protesting his capitulation
on welfare and gay rights. Dole, who doesn't
champion issues central to women’s lives,
is unlikely to win support from women who
backed Clinton for these reasons. It will
be a struggle, too, for Dole to win over
the ultra-right wing of the Republican Party.
A GOP supporter in New Hampshire told the
New York Times, "I don't believe a woman
ought to be in that particular place of
leadership - the Bible teaches us that women
shouldn't have that authority over men."
Ostensibly to avoid alienating the right,
Dole has taken a stand on only two issues:
tax "relief" and beefing up the war on drugs.
On the litmus-test issue of choice, Dole
is covering her bases. She is assertively
pro-life except in cases of rape, incest,
and endangered life of the mother— - ut
she stops short of saying she would overturn
Roe v. Wade.
Despite misgivings, the Ms. Foundation's
Marie Wilson feels that Dole has opened
the door for women to flood the election
marketplace, and notes that Dole is "out
there and for the first time no one giggled
or is cynical." Her candidacy might be seen
as a victory for PR campaigns like the White
House Project, but her election would surely
be a defeat for women. As far as the world
taking Mrs. Dole seriously: no one laughed
at Mrs. Thatcher, either.
Amelia
Richards, a contributing editor to Ms.
Magazine, a co-founder of the Third
Wave Foundation, and writer of the column
Ask
Amy, and Jennifer Baumgardner, a writer
and editor, co-wrote the book Manifest,
(Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2000).
|