Where are the women in North Carolina politics
Published May 12, 2015
by Julian March, Wilmington Star-News, May 10, 2015.
When Kay Hagan speaks to students, she impresses something on them that has nothing to do with policy or a civics lesson.
And it's this: There's never a perfect time to run for office. The message is meant especially for the young women in the room.
“So don't wait for that perfect time,” Hagan said. “It will not arrive. You just have to jump in.”
Hagan knows the numbers. Men outnumbered women by four to one when she served in the U.S. Senate. The ratio was similar during the decade Hagan spent in the N.C. General Assembly.
In North Carolina, women hold less than 25 percent of all appointed and elected offices and about 10 percent of leadership positions in the same roles, according to a report from Meredith College.
The report recommends comprehensive changes to increase the number of women in political and appointed office.
Barriers to office
It took more than 200 years for a woman to take office as governor in North Carolina.
After taking the oath of office from the third woman to serve as chief justice of the state's Supreme Court, then-Gov. Beverly Perdue addressed thousands gathered for her 2009 inauguration speech.
“My presence before you represents a departure from our past,” Perdue said in Raleigh. “It's a new beginning.”
Yet despite the success of Perdue and other high-profile leaders such as Hagan and former U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole, women remain “severely underrepresented” in North Carolina politics, according to Meredith's report, “The Status of Women in North Carolina Politics.”
The underrepresentation persists even as women form the majority of registered voters in the state.
When asked why the number of women in office is so low, Hagan responded quickly.
“Because they don't put their names on the ballot,” she said. “And if you don't put your name on the ballot, you're not going to get elected.”
Her statement is supported by the report, which says the main reason behind the low numbers is not overt discrimination or problems in the processes – it's that so few women seek office.
“When women run, women win,” the report concludes. Overt discrimination of the past is “increasingly uncommon,” it says.
The authors point to three other barriers. One, men and women have different perceptions about the qualifications to run. (Men are 60 percent more likely to say they're “very qualified” to run). Two, men are more likely to be encouraged to seek office. Three, women still bear most of the household and child care responsibilities.
Why it matters
Elected officials should more accurately reflect North Carolina's gender makeup, the report's authors argue. Women are role models for other women, enrich the public discussion, and employ “a different leadership style that encourages more inclusiveness and outreach.”
As one of 20 women in the Senate, Hagan enjoyed being a voice for women and children, she said during her final speech from the floor.
“As women senators, we bring a unique perspective to the policymaking dialogue. We understand the issues facing women and families because we've been there,” Hagan said in December. “The women of the Senate know how to bridge the partisan divide and get the job done.”
The GOP's Thom Tillis, former N.C. House speaker, unseated Hagan, a Democrat, in November in a competitive race.
Women build relationships with colleagues on both sides of the aisle, Hagan said.
“And I think when you have a relationship, you get a better camaraderie and you get, in effect, more bipartisan legislation.”
The differences are reflected in leadership styles. While men emphasize hierarchy, women are more likely to focus on cooperation and participation, the report says.
“We're more prone to negotiate and collaborate,” said Ross Harris, executive director of the Greensboro-based Institute of Political Leadership.
While women sometimes enter the political world later, it is because they are getting marriages established and children raised, she said.
“I think that also makes us really good legislators and people in public service because we are nurturing,” Harris said. “We care.”
Susan Johnson, North Carolina's only female sheriff, told the report's authors she brings a different perspective.
“My perspective as a woman in situations differs from my male counterparts because I lean more toward the idea of working toward the root of the problem than just affecting an arrest and solving the current incident,” said Johnson, who has served as Currituck County's sheriff since 2000.
Women in public life
Intentional practices by organizations across North Carolina can double the number of women seeking office in a decade, the report concludes. Educators, women's groups, elected officials, political parties and leaders can work to get more women into the political pipeline.
The Institute of Political Leadership offers a nonpartisan leadership training program for political leaders. Fellows participate in the institute's two annual classes and 44 percent of the graduates are women, Harris said.
The leadership training program is not only priming people for elected office, but also public service in other roles in government. “You don't necessarily have to be elected to be impactful,” Harris said.
The institute, which merged with the N.C. Center for Women in Public Service in 2013, offers “Women on Board” workshops, designed to increase awareness of opportunities for involvement.
Having women on appointed boards is important because the experience can be a springboard to elected office, said N.C. Secretary of State Elaine Marshall.
Marshall started out as a home economics teacher before becoming an attorney and running for office. “Any occupation can turn into political leadership,” she said.
In 1996, Marshall became the first woman elected to statewide executive office in North Carolina. She wants to see more women in elected and appointed office.
“I believe that we need to get women, young women – high school girls, middle school girls – to think about being leaders and to think about being just as effective in these positions as anybody else,” Marshall said.
Mentoring programs and job shadowing could help young women visualize careers in public life, she said. “Girls just don't quite visualize it early enough or often enough.”
http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20150510/ARTICLES/150429662/1015/news0101?template=printpicart
May 12, 2015 at 10:14 am
Norm Kelly says:
Some things are harder to finish reading than others. With Chris it's usually hard to read because when you start with a false premise, the rest of the supporting 'argument' also must be false, so it's not worth reading. When the unqualified community organizer racist occupier speaks it's not worth listening to cuz it's either a lie or some garbage about white people and stupidity. With this post, it comes down to another whine by libs about quotas. No, I have not and will not read the entire post. It has nothing to do with too few women in office. It has to do with libs wanting a quota system that doesn't work for employment to be replicated into the election cycle. Just like the idea libs have about blacks representing blacks, how will libs pull off a quota system for women pols? They can't possibly create majority female districts, can they?
Will libs start eliminating some votes because they weren't cast for the correct female candidate?
Is there natural discrimination built into our political system that prevents women from being elected? Obviously. See, sometimes I can 'think' like a lib.
Since Billary is not a qualified woman, should she be running for office? (most don't consider billary female anyway, so should women get behind her without any thought process?) Too many women want women to get behind Billary for the sole reason that she is (mostly) female. Just like libs wanted the majority of voters to get behind the current socialist occupier because he's black and solely because he's black, these same people expect voters to get behind Billary for the sole reason of the sexual organs involved. With the current community organizer occupant, qualifications were 'a distraction'. With Billary, qualifications, like Benghazi and the Clinton Crime Family Foundation, are simply distractions. So, once again, qualifications are irrelevant so long as the sexual organs are correct.
How's that for a summary of the editorial without even reading it?! Better to have a qualified candidate who KNOWS the role of government, and it's restrictions, than to desire a person because of some external feature that is irrelevant! Unless you happen to be a lib. Then external features ARE the most important.