RunningForOffice0 RunningHead:RunningForOffice

JaneDoeisRunningforOffice

KateMcNally NorthernArizonaUniversity

English305W WritinginDisciplinaryCommunities Dr.FlowerDarby March18,2010

RunningForOffice1

Abstract
This essay takes a look at the history of women in politics and the challenges they face. It attempts to define obstacles facing candidates today and outline methodswithwhichtocounteractthem.Womenhavebeenactiveinallpolitical parties since the 1890s. From the suffrage movement to the establishment of womensdivisionsinthemajorpoliticalpartiesthroughthetransition ofwomen in mainstream politics, women have faced untold challenges to both their support of and participation in the electoral process. There is a real need for increased participation by women in politics. Women should be encouraged to be more actively involved with the political process regardless of political affiliation. More research needs to be done to pinpoint weakness in the political process that hinder womens chances as an elective candidate and to discover betterwaystoenabletheirsuccess.

RunningForOffice2

TableofContents
TABLEOFCONTENTS.......................................................................................................................................... 2 LISTOFTABLES.............................................................................................................................................................. 2 LISTOFFIGURES............................................................................................................................................................. 2 HISTORYOFWOMENINPOLITICSINARIZONA................................................................................................... 3 THESUFFRAGEMOVEMENT............................................................................................................................................. 3 ISABELLAGREENWAY...................................................................................................................................................... 4 THEARIZONAFIVE......................................................................................................................................................... 6 WOMENASCANDIDATES................................................................................................................................... 7 RECRUITMENT............................................................................................................................................................... 7 CAMPAIGNSTRATEGIES................................................................................................................................................... 7 MEDIA......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 FUNDRAISING............................................................................................................................................................... 9 NEWDIRECTIONSINRESEARCHONWOMEN&POLITICS.................................................................................... 9 FUTURERESEARCH......................................................................................................................................................... 9 EXPANDPARTICIPATION................................................................................................................................................ 10 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 10 WORKSCITED................................................................................................................................................... 15

ListofTables
TABLE1STATEVARIATIONSPERCENTAGEBYSTATE(OXLEYANDFOX2004,115).................................................................... 11 TABLE2STATEVARIATIONBYCHARACTERISTICS(OXLEYANDFOX2004,117)..................................................................... 12 TABLE3PROBLEMSPERCEIVEDBYWOMENCANDIDATES(CARROL1994,52).......................................................................... 13 TABLE4ADVANTAGESPERCEIVEDBYWOMENCANDIDATE(CARROL1994,53)....................................................................... 14

ListofFigures
FIGURE1FRANCESWILLARDMUNDS ..................................................................................................................................... 4 FIGURE2NELLIETBUSH..................................................................................................................................................... 4 FIGURE3ISABELLAGREENWAY............................................................................................................................................. 6 FIGURE41999ARIZONAINAUGURATION(ARIZONASTATELIBRARY1999).................................................................................. 6

RunningForOffice3

JaneDoeisRunningforOffice
In the 2008 Presidential primaries women squared off against men and themselves for the chance to run for the highest office in the country. Unfortunately, none of them made it far enough along the campaign trail to win that coveted spot. Why? It wasnt just because they were women. Various obstacles and challenges face women running for electoral offices all over the country. Funding, family situations, ethnic orientation, religious affiliations, physical and emotional stress, as well as the design of the political structure of the parties themselves all conspire against female candidates. Women should be encouraged to be more actively involved with the political process regardless of political affiliation.

HistoryofWomeninPoliticsinArizona
TheSuffrageMovement
Wearehereforbusiness. With this simple statement Frances Willard Munds, who was then leader of the Arizona suffrage movement and the first woman to serve in the Arizona State Senate, quickly established how serious she was about her role in government. On January 19, 1915 she presided over the state senate session and not only did she encapsulate her approach to government but she won the respect of both the press and her fellow senators. (Osselaer 2003, 17) The campaign platform for suffrage emphasized womans role as pioneers. They requested the right to vote based on their sacrifices and contributions. Sixty Eight percent of voters agreed giving the suffrage movement the largest national margin of victory to date. (Osselaer 2003, 18) After the amendment was passed, historians have noted that few women succeeded in politics. Since politics was a mans game, most women felt uncomfortable outside a family styled environment. Some lacked the needed political socialization and skills. Few ran for office. Those in Arizona that were

RunningForOffice4

relatively successful against male candidates tended to have the same traits; aggressive, talented, pragmatic and knowledgeable about politics. Eager to participate in politics Arizona womans leaders were back by the National and Arizona Federation of Business and Professional Womans Clubs. Largely overlooked in studies, these clubs encouraged women to run for public office, were the primary organization for recruiting women and gave voice to womens issues of the time. The Arizona BPW had one goal: break down barriers to advancement by ensuring equal treatment of women. (Osselaer 2003, 19) The experience of growing up in the west may have socialized women to take an active role in politics to a greater extent than their eastern seaboard sisters. Arizona womens legislation had higher success rate, 30 % overall, due largely to the fact that on average they introduced more bills to the House. Over half of the bills introduced by female candidates covered education, child welfare, libraries, public health, and morality issues. (Osselaer 2003, 21) Most women, like Nellie T. Bush, found few obstacles on the way to the legislature. However, once there they couldnt use this political experience to gain a state or federal office. The voting public wouldnt be ready for that until 1990s.

FIGURE 1 NELLIE T BUSH (ArizonaStateLibrary1920) FIGURE 2 FRANCES WILLARD MUNDS (ARIZONA STATE LIBRARY 1918)

IsabellaGreenway
IthinknowIhavebeenwaitingforitallmylife. Isabella Greenway was elected Arizonas first congresswoman in the primary election in 1933 with Seventy percent of the vote. The key to her political career was not only her own personal business savvy but her lifelong friendship with the Roosevelt Family, a close friend of his niece Eleanor and bride of Robert Munro

RunningForOffice5

Ferguson, a Rough Rider. Isabella first entered politics by registering voters and campaigning for her husband. Bob Ferguson died in 1922 and Isabella remarried. Unfortunately, in 1926, her second husband Jon Greenway also died. In 1928, with Eleanor Roosevelt as a political ally, she was named Arizonas Democratic national committeewoman. (Miller 2004, 122) By 1930, the people of Arizona hoped that Isabella Greenway would run as a candidate for governor. While it was more likely that she was afraid men might resent her participation, Isabella claimed avoidance of criticism of personal prominence as her reason for not running. (Miller 2004, 126) It was former governor Lyman Hunt that encouraged Isabella to consider taking a run at the Congressional seat. Isabella was named by Hunt to the commission planning Arizonas exhibit at the upcoming 1933 Chicagos Worlds Fair. Hailed a political phenomenon by some the press at the Democratic convention in Chicago latched on to her link between Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt. In February of that same year Isabella resigned as a national committeewoman and planned to run as U.S. congressman at large from Arizona. (Miller 2004, 130) The Arizona Daily Star as well as most of the states newspapers backed her congressional run because she had done more for the Democratic party and the state of Arizona than any other candidate. Organizations supporting her sprang up all over the state crossing ethnic, economic and even political lines. (Miller 2004, 133) Once sworn in on January 3, 1934, Representative Greenway spent more time responding to anxious constituents than crafting new legislation. She was also appointed to both the Indian Affairs and Public Lands Committees. When she lobbied hard for the copper industry and for veterans, some suggested that she was in fact the most dangerous foe the administration has in the chamber. (Miller 2004, 134) When she retired Greenway left behind a newly invigorated, well organized Democratic party.

RunningForOffice6

Isabella was an independently wealthy businesswoman with experience as a loyal party worker who cultivated a close personal relationship with the sitting President to further her own career. Her ability to travel into rural Arizona made it possible for her to unite and energize Arizonas democrats and bring them back to the party.
FIGURE 3 ISABELLA GREENWAY (ARIZONA STATE LIBRARY 1935)

FIGURE 4 1999 ARIZONA INAUGURATION (ARIZONA STATE LIBRARY 1999)

TheArizonaFive
In November of 1998 Arizona became the first state to elect an all female chain of command. Governor Jane Hull, Secretary of State Betsy Bayless, Attorney General Janet Napolitano, Treasurer Carol Springer and Superintendent of Public Instruction Lisa Graham Keegan were known as the Fab Five. (Coplan 1999, 60) Their collective win can be attributed to good public policy and the legacy of women in the west. It was the west that first granted women the right to vote, divorce own property and practice law. (Coplan 1999, 63) According to Coplan, women in general tend to vote democratic. Only one of the five was a democrat. A closer look at party history illustrates why the centrist republicans were able to sweep the top five seats in Arizona. Napolitano herself said, "I think it's important, too, that it's not just that five women were elected, but each of the five has had a significant record in public service jobs. This was not a fluke. This is what happens when lots of women are entering political life." (Gabriel 1999)

RunningForOffice7

WomenasCandidates Recruitment While men have traditionally been offered political opportunities for loyal party service, women have not. (Carrol 1994, 24) Some women with sufficient credibility and resources have mounted insurgent campaigns and won. Party leaders would prefer to avoid such incidents in an effort to strengthen their control over the party. As a result some pressure has been felt by the party leaders to consider more women candidates. Party leaders may also have chosen to back more women candidates to regain voter trust in the wake of Watergate. There are three possible patterns for recruitment by party leaders. First, by actively recruiting women for low prestige offices, where voter prejudice would be less intense and are less likely to be desired by male candidates. Second, by recruiting women as sacrificial lambs, offices where the party is not expected to win anyway and the party doesnt want to risk running a promising male candidate. Third, by recruiting women to run for offices in multimember districts, offices where they only risk losing one seat as opposed to the only seat. (Carrol 1994, 27) The time has come to integrate the three patterns of participation and explore how they are linked. The understanding of dynamic womens recruitment and the complex participation depend on it. (Carroll 2003, 47) Recruitment is an ongoing process and effects participation of women in politics. CampaignStrategies In order to identify successful strategic and tactical maneuvers to overcome the innumerable of political impediments that surface over the progression of a campaign, we must explore the internal dynamics of the campaign itself. Decision making, staffing patterns, media strategy, fund raising and voter targeting are key according to Joan E. McLean. (Carroll 2003, 53) While women and men employ different decision making styles, they vary no more in the political arena then they do in the corporate world. Men favor hierarchical or competitive styles. Women

RunningForOffice8

prefer a more collegial setting. A woman who feels the decision making style is as important as the campaign will be willing to put in the extra hours but it might end up costing her the election in the long run. The man hours it would take to conduct an individual study, let alone a multiple case study make it impractical to gather the necessary data to determine what, if any, affect this has on the overall outcome of the election. (Carroll 2003, 56) Often a mix of volunteers and professional staffers are used on campaigns. Local and part time legislative seats depend more heavily on volunteers. Paid staff and consultants are more likely to work for statewide or federal offices. A well run organization is obvious. Everyone knows what to expect at every stage of the campaign, from whos on the need to know list to what time the local coffee shop opens. The most difficult thing for a candidate to adapt to may be learning to delegate. Without this competent support system a candidate could lose valuable time campaigning effectively. Another challenge might be transitioning from an all volunteer, mostly family oriented, campaign to a professionally run operation. Either way, to be effective, campaign strategies need to be tailored to the hands on style most women prefer. Media Credibility is one of the most important early messages of a campaign. Since male candidates are more likely to be taken seriously, female candidates often end up explaining not only their political history but their personal history as well. Its difficult for women candidates to not only get accurate reporting from the media regarding their qualifications but to have the media recognize their capability to run a sustainable campaign. (Carroll 2003, 59) Although according to Carroll female reporters are more likely to treat women candidates seriously than their male counterparts. Good campaigns develop pro active strategies to handle this biased press coverage. One strategy that has worked well for women candidates is effectively using the outsider image to take advantage of voters anti incumbency feelings. Women candidates

RunningForOffice9

have also used positive only advertising and humor to defuse negative advertising by their opponents.

FundRaising
In comparable races men and women candidates raise, on average, similar amounts of campaign funds. Its unclear however how the allocation of resources for raising those funds compares. it is clear that male politicians are more willing to spend more of their own personal money on a campaign then their female counterparts. (Carroll 2003, 63) Women candidates repeatedly list money as the overriding obstacle to a successful campaign. Men by the nature of their socialization skills are also more comfortable asking for money upfront. Women candidates have also been known to be more reluctant to authorize campaign expenses then men with the same goals and resources. (Carrol 1994, 51) One thing candidates of both genders can agree on is the massive blocks of time that must be devoted to fund raising.

NewDirectionsinResearchonWomen&Politics
FutureResearch
A new research agenda must be adapted that includes a multi method approach. Qualitative interviews and focus groups will enable researches to gather comprehensive information on thought processes and beliefs not only of the candidates both male and female but of the voters as well. Without one the other is meaningless. A more in depth look at the gender gap will assist campaigns in fine tuning their strategy to make allowances due to age and experience. Mass media should be systematically researched to fully examine the influence of media on the political process. Innovative and creative research designs as well as traditional surveys, field research and content analysis will yield the information necessary for consultants to help politicians make effective decisions regarding their media choices.

RunningForOffice10

ExpandParticipation A broad study of participation of women in politics is the key to the future. Women candidates are no longer limited by womans issues, abortion, birth control, childcare, maternity/paternity leave and education are becoming mainstream issues. Participation in non traditional political activities must be evaluated in order to facilitate recruitment of female candidates to traditional legislative positions. Understanding the construct of these welfare issues gives a greater understanding of the changing nature and practices not only of politics but of basic citizenship. (Carroll 2003, 218) In order to understand politics we must understand all the varieties of participation by women in all her networking roles. Conclusions In 2007 a small town of McLean in Texas elected Peggy Baer as mayor. She led a five woman board of aldermen. Women also filled the positions of city secretary, justice of the peace, and postmaster, mangers of the bank, feed store, grocery store and nursing home. While the school superintendent was male the two schools had female principals. (Blaney 2008) It appears that the election of women to higher political offices has indeed spread far and wide. While women from Arizona have a rich political history and distinct advantage, most women will continue to have individual struggles within the current party system. Recruiting, funding, campaigning and serving in any office is an ongoing battle. Further studies should be conducted to explore possible solutions to ensure that every candidate has a fighting chance. The voters must make a conscious decision to take an active part in the process. Whether its simply voting in every election or volunteering for a specific party or making the jump to running for office. Women (and men) who choose to do their civic duty should be supported and applauded. Sometimes it takes only one voice saying yes you can to make the difference and turn a small campaign into a huge victory.

RunningForOffice11

TABLE 1 STATE VARIATIONS PERCENTAGE BY STATE (OXLEY AND FOX 2004, 115) STATEVARIATIONINWOMENEXECUTIVEOFFICIALS,19791998 State Percentageof State Percentageof Women Women ExecutiveOfficials ExecutiveOfficials NewJersey 40.0 Alabama 14.2 Colorado 38.1 Tennessee 13.3 Indiana 36.7 Virginia 13.3 Arizona 36.4 Arkansas 13.1 Delaware 35.9 Illinois 12.0 Kansas 33.0 Nebraska 12.0 Minnesota 32.0 Vermont 11.7 Nevada 30.0 Florida 10.8 Connecticut 29.0 California 10.7 Oregon 28,0 Utah 10.0 Oklahoma 25.2 Louisiana 7.5 Pennsylvania 25.0 Kentucky 7.3 Wyoming 24.0 NewMexico 6.7 Missouri 23.3 NewYork 6.7 Michigan 20.0 SouthCarolina 6.7 Montana 20.0 Georgia 5.0 NewHampshire 20.0 Wisconsin 5.0 Ohio 20.0 Massachusetts 4.0 Texas 19.7 NorthCarolina 2.0 RhodeIsland 18.0 Alaska 0.0 Washington 17.5 Hawaii 0.0 Idaho 17.1 Maine 0.0 Iowa 16.7 Maryland 0.0 NorthDakota 16.3 Mississippi 0.0 SouthDakota 15.0 WestVirginia 0.0

RunningForOffice12

TABLE 2 STATE VARIATION BY CHARACTERISTICS (OXLEY AND FOX 2004, 117)

STATE VARlATION IN WOMEN CANDIDATES AND WOMEN EXECUTIVE OFFICEHOLDERS, 1979-1998

Column1 Political System: Number of Exec. Offices Power of Exec. Offices State Population Party Recruitment Processes: Rep. Party Dominance One-Party Dominance Party Control Nominations Candidate Supply: Women Lawyers Women in State Legislature Moralistic Culture Traditional Culture Women Candidates Gatekeeper Demands: State Liberalism State Feminism Masculine Offices Feminine Offices Women Candidates (lag) Women Officeholders (lag) Constant Number of Cases Adjusted R2

Women Candidates Unstand a -.02 (.34) .10 (1.09) -.02 (.02) 2.82 (1.35)* -.86 (1.13) 1.38 (1.72) .55 (.26)* -.02 (.19) -2.04 (1.37) -5.16 (2.22)* Stand b -0.004 0.004 -0.086 0.143 -0.034 0.033 0.213 -0.01 -0.07 -. 174

Women Officeholders Unstand a -.59 (.40) -2.84 (1.28)* .01 (.01) -1.59 (2.04) -1.29 (2.18) Stand b -0.075 -0.086 0.026 -0.056 -0.035

1.08 (.12)*** -. 13 (.33) -. 79 (5.51) -. 13 (.06)* .08 (.07) .40 (.06)*** 14.09 206 0.44 -. 033 -. 010 -. 135 0.052 0.362 -.44 (.28) .97 (4.29) .20 (.10) .20 (.10)*t .14 (.07)*t 8.63 206 0.66

0.754 -0.079 0.008 0.146 0.09 0.119

RunningForOffice13

TABLE 3 PROBLEMS PERCEIVED BY WOMEN CANDIDATES (CARROL 1994, 52) ProblemsPerceivedbyWomenCandidates,1976,WhoRaninContestedPrimaries

Problems Resources Money People Time OrganizedSupport Party Organizations Media Campaignrelatedproblems Visibility Organization/planning DirtyPolitics Issuepositions Opponents CharacteristicsofVoters DificultyContactingVoters Voterapathyordistrust DistricCharacteristics Sexrelatedproblems Beingawoman Woman'sissues Lackofsupportfromother women Candidatecharacteristics Namefamiliarity Personalitycharacteristics Otherproblems Noproblemsmentioned N=

Congress 58.00 22.00 16.00 16.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 10.00 6.00 0.00 8.00 2.00 6.00 6.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 10.00 4.00 8.00 14.00
50

OFFICE State Statewide Senate 52.90 5.90 11.80 0.00 0.00 5.90 11.80 5.90 5.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.90 0.00 17.60 5.90 0.00 5.90 0.00 5.90 11.80
17

State House 27.90 15.80 15.80 13.20 5.60 1.90 3.70 8.20 8.40 1.10 10.20 1.70 5.20 6.70 8.90 1.90 1.70 7.10 5.60 7.10 20.30
462

40.00 18.70 16.00 13.30 2.70 4.00 4.00 9.30 10.70 1.30 10.47 1.30 10.70 9.30 13.30 8.00 0.00 9.30 2.70 9.30 10.70
75

RunningForOffice14

TABLE 4 ADVANTAGES PERCEIVED BY WOMEN CANDIDATE (CARROL 1994, 53)

AdvantagesPerceivedbyWomenCandidates,1976,WhoRaninContestedPrimaries OFFICE State State Advantages Congress Statewide Senate House Resources Money People Time Incumbency OrganizedSupport Party Organizationalandmediaendorsements Officeholders,localleaders Campaignrelatedproblems Weakopponents Priorcampaignexperience Goodorganization Goodpublicity CharacteristicsofVoters Voterdistrustofincumbents Supportfromvotersgenerally Sexrelatedadvantages Beingawoman Supportfromotherwomen Candidatecharacteristics Wellknown,goodreputation Recordinpolitics Knowledge Personalitycharacteristics Traininginanotherfield Husband/family Otherproblems Noproblemsmentioned N= 16.00 4.00 12.00 8.00 2.00 2.00 2.50 36.00 50 10.00 2.00 35.50 17.60 0.00 17.60 0.00 0.00 5.90 33.30 17 5.90 5.90 20.00 8.00 6.70 8.00 0.00 5.30 1.30 35.90 75 12.00 2.70 21.60 6.10 5.40 5.60 3.50 3.40 4.10 23.50 462 7.60 1.50 6.00 10.00 11.80 0.00 4.00 6.70 2.40 4.50 10.00 10.00 6.00 0.00 11.80 5.90 5.90 0.00 4.00 9.30 10.70 1.30 3.70 8.20 8.40 1.10 2.00 6.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 11.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.90 0.00 0.00 1.30 2.70 5.30 4.00 20.00 0.00 8.00 1.90 3.70 2.20 3.20 10.40 2.80 5.60

RunningForOffice15

WorksCited
ArizonaStateLibrary."Arizonagovenors;ArizonaWomen."ArizonaStateLibrary.1999. http://photos.lib.az.us/photos_Detail.cfm?ID=16608(accessedMarch2010). ."FrancesWillardMunds."ArizonaWoman'sHallofFame.1918. http://www.lib.az.us/awhof/IMAGES/women/munds.jpg(accessedFebruary2010). ."IsabellaGreenwayKing."ArizonaWomen'sHallofFame.1935. http://www.lib.az.us/awhof/women/king.cfm(accessedFebruary2010). ."NellieT.Bush."ArizonaWoman'sHallofFame.1920. http://www.lib.az.us/awhof/women/bush.cfm(accessedFebruary2010). Blaney,Betsy."Atownwherethegoodol'boysaregirls."AssociatedPress,2008:1. Carrol,SusanJ.WomenasCandidatesinAmericanPolitics.2nd.BloomingtonandIndianapolis,IN: IndianaUniversityPress,1994. Carroll,SusanJ.WomanandAmericanPolitics:NewQuestions,NewDirections.NewYork,NY:Oxford UniversityPress,2003. Coplan,JillHamburg."Theunrepublicans.(womeninRepublicanleadershiproles)."WorkingWoman, 1999:6064. Gabriel,Angela."Stateshiftingpoliticalimage.(electionoffivewomentoArizona'stopfivestate offices)."TheBusinessJournalServingPhoenix&theValleyoftheSun,1999:19(2). Miller,Kristie."'Ihavebeenwaitingforitallmylife':TheCongressionalCareerofIsabellaGreenway." THEJOURNALOFARIZONAHISTORY,2004:121142. Osselaer,Heidi."'WeAreHereForBusiness':WomenintheArizonaLegislature,1914to1940."Journal oftheWest,2003:1742. Oxley,ZoeM.,andRichardL.Fox."WomeninExecutiveOffice:VariationAcrossAmericanStates." PoliticalResearchQuarterly,2004:113(9). McNally,KathrynS(): Youhavesubmittedyourassignment(McNally,KathrynS()). SubmittedTime:March10,201010:40PM