Beyond Clinton & Gender: Who’s Up for Democracy?

There’s been a lot of discussion these past few days about Senator Clinton in response to my Table for One posts. Of course, in the current political climate, it makes sense to reference her historic bid for the presidency when discussing women’s political leadership. But it’s also important not to conflate her candidacy with broader concepts regarding the political pipeline and the “first and only” phenomenon. What I am most concerned with, when it comes down to it, is the bigger picture: the monumental task of transforming our system of government into the representational democracy it really should be.

The desire for that kind of change is precisely what’s driven record numbers of voters turn out for their Presidential primaries year. The formula is simple, and it’s the key to how you get new people invested in democracy: offer people candidates who are not only politically savvy and experienced, but who also actually look like them, and voters will begin to feel there is place for them in our political system. In both Senators Obama and Clinton, many voters see viable candidates who, for the first time, are accessible and familiar - a closer reflection of the voters themselves. That’s the beauty of representational democracy — people feel that their interests are truly being spoken for - and hence become more likely to be involved in the political process.

But one or two people alone can not make change in this nation. In order to bring about real change we need numbers. We live in a wonderfully diverse country, and although we have a woman and a black man vying for the presidency, we are still a far cry from being a truly representational democracy. For example, though they make up 51% of the population, women constitute only 16% of Congress and 23% of state legislators. Only 5% of the women serving in statewide elective offices are women of color. When I founded The White House Project, I was determined to create a program that would correct this disparity, propelling a critical mass of women into positions of political leadership. In 2005, Vote, Run Lead was born.

This grassroots initiative aims to increase the number of women in the political pipeline by equipping them with the inspiration, information, and tools they’ll need to be successful, effective leaders. Since launching the program, we’ve reached over 5,000 women, and have trained over 1,400 to run for political office. We work with women across the country, from Minnesota’s rural North Country to the urban centers of Atlanta, Detroit, and New York. They come from all ages and stages of life, and include some of the most underrepresented women in our political system: 41% are women of color; 46% earn less than $35,000 a year; 20% live in rural communities; and 50% are under the age of 30. They are crossing-guards and corporate execs, college students and community organizers.

They are the new faces and voices of American leadership.

But Vote, Run, Lead is more than a simple training program: it’s a powerful means of connecting women to democracy. Because what these women seek is a pathway to their own political participation. They are passionate about the issues and their communities. They are drawn to both politics and leadership. But they each ask in earnest, “Can I have a family and lead a political life? Can I be a politician and keep my integrity? Can I affect change and really make a difference?” Politics is a system in which they are eager to participate but in which they cannot locate themselves; what they crave are leaders who look like them, leaders they can relate to, and a demystification of the political arena which has historically been a strictly masculine domain. So we screen “Unbought and Unbossed” and show them the exemplary leadership of Shirley Chisholm. We provide access to high-level women leaders, and speakers who teach them the “ins and outs” of political leadership. We show them that there is a place for them in this system too. Through Vote, Run Lead, we are connecting these women one by one, city by city, state by state, and building a movement to transform our democracy.

It’s also important to stress that our vision of political change is one where women are leading alongside men. Our nation suffers when the degree of women’s political participation is so perilously low – it affects the quality and substance of our governance. When we increase the diversity of our leadership, we allow for a richer transmission of viewpoints that leads to a stronger, more equitable government. Public policy is then crafted with attention to the needs of all, instead of catering to special interests alone.

As I discovered when writing my book, Closing the Leadership Gap, research abounds with evidence that women bring about positive change in the political arena. Prominent research institutions, including Rutgers and American Universities, have spent decades studying the issue, and have concluded that women tend to include diverse viewpoints in decision making, have a broader conception of public policy, and offer new solutions. It’s an assertion that we have seen play out time and again on the political stage.

I’m proud of all the work that The White House Project is doing to move women’s leadership forward. But there’s so much more work to do. We need to combat the misogyny that slips its way into the mainstream on a regular basis (i.e., for those who doubt the power of the aforementioned “Bro’s Before Ho’s” t-shirt, do you not think that young girls everywhere are belittled by it? That it discourages our daughters, nieces, granddaughters from becoming the future leaders that they are entitled to be?). We need to create an environment where it is acceptable for women to ascend to leadership, and make it the norm.

It’s great that women voters have been receiving so much attention this election season. But true civic engagement is about more than the periodic casting of a ballot. It’s about political participation engendered by a social and political climate wherein one’s voice and vision are valued as much as their vote. And it’s about a system of government that provokes participation because all of the populace is adequately represented – and inspires their involvement because all have the opportunity to lead.

With that in mind, I suggest that we move beyond the Clinton question and ask this instead: When the nominating showdown comes to a close, how do we sustain and build upon our nation’s political enthusiasm and participation? How will we mobilize the young and disenfranchised to continue agitating for equal representation? Because change can only come through the power, momentum, and intensity of everyday people who are committed to propelling that change forward.