When Sarah Palin was picked, many derided her as an obvious play for female voters. I thought and still think, that in the likely event that’s true, it’s still a form of progress. Every movement loves to pick up token spokespeople from areas where they’re traditionally weak. However, elected officials are different as they actually have power.
Practical example: the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. As Matt Yglesias notes, five Senate Republicans voted for this bill. They were Arlen Specter and the four female Republicans. I think the impact on abortion politics will be secondary. While the ban abortion leadership is mostly male if memory serves the polls are more evenly divided. On other issues involving women’s rights, I expect more progress to be made.
As the demographics of this country change, winning white males doesn’t cut it. If the GOP can’t do a better job of crossing ethnic lines they have to try to cross gender lines. As Democrats field more women the pressure there will increase. I could be wrong, this will be easily testable, but I think the Palin pick wasn’t a one-off fluke but will be indicative of GOP recruiting strategy in the future
I also suspect that if a stable compromise happens on abortion, it will only happen after there are enough women in the Republican leadership that they could be the point people for the whole caucus. Otherwise, if I’m wrong and Republican women elected officials will follow the Ledbetter model, then the status quo will prove stable and no compromise will be necessary.
Comments