The Impact of Women in the United States Congress

Purpose​: Educate individuals/voters on the impact of those who they do or do not elect into US
Congress
Thesis​: Although historically underrepresented, women serving in the United States Congress
positively affect the operation and effectiveness of the legislature as a whole. Women’s mere
presence bring new perspectives, priorities, and mindsets to light, while fighting not just for their
own constituents, but for those who are too often ignored in the face of policy making.

I. Introduction & History

A. The first woman to serve in Congress was Jeannette Rankin of Montana in 1916,
Alice Mary Robinson of Oklahoma was the first woman to beat a male incumbent
congressman in 1920, and the first-ever woman Senator, Rebecca Latimer of
Georgia, served for only one day to fill the seat of her recently deceased husband
(Desilver, 2015): ​highlights the short length of time women have been in
Congress and their historic underrepresentation, just starting to be
represented about 100 years ago
B. Most women were not elected until the early 1990s to the 2000s. In 2015, of the
278 women who had served in the House of Representatives, more than half had
been elected since 1992, 23 of the 46 women ever elected to the Senate took
office in 1996 or later (Desilver, 2015): ​relates to the historical
underrepresentation of women in Congress, probably only currently coming
into radar
C. Women combine to be roughly 19.4% of the United States Congress and 24.2%
of state legislatures (Sanbonmatsu 2015): ​underrepresentation
D. While women make up approximately 96.8% of preschool and kindergarten
teachers, 70.1% of waiters, and 89.4% of Registered Nurses in America, they only
make up about 12% of governors (Kurtzleben 2016): ​disproportionate number
of women in this field/representing
E. The United States ranks 100 out of 190 countries and falls behind countries such
as Rwanda, Mexico, Ethiopia, Sudan, Afghanistan, and the United Arab Emirates
(“Women in National Parliaments,” 2018): ​compared to the world, the United
States is behind
II. How Women Govern
A. Women are more likely to be bipartisan and work across party lines: ​leads to
more success and greater policy initiatives/more effective/working
environment
1. In a 2017 collection of congressional interviews, a majority of women
interviewed believe that females are more likely than their male
counterparts to work across party lines (Dittmar et al., 2017)
 2. the National Bureau of Economic Research focused on how gender affects
bipartisanship and concluded women are more likely to cooperate through
bipartisanship, particularly if working on a bill that focuses on health,
education, or social welfare (McGill, 2016)
3. Over the past seven years, female Senators have co sponsored, on average,
171.08 bills with a member of the opposite party, while that figure for men
is 129.87 bills (Gay, 2015)
B. Women tend to be more collaborative due to forming friendships with colleagues:
putting stock in friendship has led to more cosponsorship and alliances
between the women, leading to greater success when banding together
1. Multiple studies from the Center for American Women in Politics have
found women in both the Senate and the House of Representatives tend to
be more willing to put stock in personal friendships and bonds than men in
their same position (Newton-Small, 2016)
2. A group of bipartisan women Senators have monthly dinner meetings,
where they often forge friendships before deals (Newton-Small, 2016)
3. “I think the reality of [why friendships work] is if you focus on something
that makes people human beings...if you actually find a way to be friendly
with each other and understand where they are coming from, that’s how
you get an agreement. I think women can do that.” - Senator Patty Murray
4. Senator Patty Murray and Speaker Paul Ryan’s relationship (​case in point
for collaborative friendships leading to success as in getting a budget,
etc.​)
C. Women tend to be more results-oriented: ​focused on policy, a different
perspective than the *average* male in Congress, leads to different results if
women are included
1. In the 2017 interviews, women serving in the US Congress also believe
women are more results-oriented; overall, women are more concerned
with achieving policy outcomes rather than receiving publicity or credit
(Dittmar et al., 2017)
2. In a 2001 survey of American members of Congress, the number one
reason, according to female legislators, they ran for office was “the ability
to effect change in society,” for males, that reason was because “they
always wanted to be a politician” (2001)
3. It could be assumed this could cause women to be less successful in this
field, but by often refusing to grandstand, women tend to gain more
support from their constituents (Newton-Small, 2016)
III. Different Strengths: ​relying on one gender can lead to an imbalance of perspective
and ideas
 A. Communication: Each day, women speak up to 8,000 words and use as many as
10,000 gestures. Men use fewer daily words (up to 4,000) and gestures (up to
3,000) (Shambaugh, 2016)
B. Emotions: Women’s brains favor more emotional activity in the mid-brain region,
while men show more rational activity in the top of the brain
C. Task orientation: Men generally focus on one task and compartmentalize more
brain activity, while women gravitate toward multitasking.
D. Attention to details: Women tend to absorb more information through their senses
and store more of it in the brain for other uses than men do. Therefore, women
generally have more interest in details and pay more attention to them than men
do
E. Stress: Men tend to deal with stress much more easily than women, as it’s harder
for women to shut down their autostress response
F. Logic vs. language: Men tend to have better logic skills than women, while
women exhibit generally better language skills than men
G. Researchers at Yale determined back in the nineties that men’s tendency is to
primarily use the left side of their brain, while women generally shift back and
forth, drawing on both the left and right sides
IV. More Likely to Delegate: ​easier to tackle bigger and more divisive issues,
theoretically more women leading could affect more success in bigger and more
important topics and policies in Congress
A. PTA legislating: this type of legislating is a “high-effort, consensus-building”
tactic that helps women tackle large, divisive issues more effectively than men,
according to one Vanderbilt University study (Newton-Small, 2016)
B. When women propose, sponsor, or cosponsor a bill, they are more likely to
delegate the tasks at hand (Sanbonmatsu, 2015)
C. “Women are more likely to say, ‘I can’t do all this, but what if I take this and you
take that and so-and-so takes another piece,’” - Former Senator Blanche Lincoln
D. This tactic was used by Senator Stabenow to effectively get a one trillion dollar
farm bill through the Senate, Senator Boxer used “PTA legislating” to
successfully authorize three-hundred billion dollars for transportation
infrastructure (Newton-Small, 2016)
V. Proposed Legislation: ​men and women propose different legislation on different
topics, and women’s tendency to make these certain types of policies most help
families & minority groups who often get left out of this process
A. In 1988, Sue Thomas found that women are more likely to make bills dealing
with women’s issues, children, and family a priority (Sanbonmatsu, 2015)
B. Throughout recent years, women fought for women’s health coverage in the
Affordable Care Act, strongly pushed for a sexual harassment rules in the
 military, and debated for child care vouchers in the welfare overhaul (Miller,
2016)
C. Michele Swers found that all women, despite party, were more likely to sponsor
women’s issues bills in both Congresses (Sanbonmatsu, 2015)
D. When one legislature was surveyed, 69% of women and 62% of men said the
increased presence of women in their chamber made legislature more sympathetic
to the concerns of racial and ethnic minority groups (2001)
E. Both men and women believe women legislators have increased legislative
attention to how bills will affect women through floor speeches and representation
in closed door meetings and debates (Sanbonmatsu, 2015)
VI. Women’s Success in Congress: ​outcomes of the different perspectives, proves the
different perspectives pay off
A. Congresswomen secure roughly nine percent more federal funding and
discretionary programs (Anzia & Berry, 2011)
B. Just in the year 2012, women produced 75% of major legislation that passed the
Senate (Newton-Small, 2016)
C. Senator Boxer saw through $12.5 billion dollars for a water resources bill and $54
billion dollars in a transportation bill, Senator Stabenow got a $995 billion dollar
farm bill passed, Senator Mikulski shepherded more than 12 appropriations bills,
and all twenty women came together to ensure the passage of the Violence
Against Women Act (Newton-Small, 2016)
D. A bipartisan group of fourteen senators, led by six women, banded together and
ended the shutdown. The next news cycle prided women on this accomplishment,
and some of the headlines read “Senate Women Lead in Effort to Find Accord,”
“Men Got Us in the Shutdown -- Women Got Us Out,” and “Women are the Only
Adults Left in Washington” (Newton-Small, 2016)
VII. Women in Leadership Positions​: how women in the legislature are able to speak for
minority, adding new perspective and leadership to a (before) strictly male
environment
A. In a national CAWP survey, 42% of women legislators disagreed with the
statement “most men in my legislature are supportive of moving women into
leadership positions” (Sanbonmatsu, 2015)
B. A 2001 study from the Center for American Women in Politics found that women
state legislators are equally as likely as their male colleagues to aspire to high
political office, but women are slightly more likely than men to aspire to
higher-level legislative offices such as Congress rather than gubernatorial or
presidential positions
 C. In 2012, for the first time, women headed eleven out of the twenty Senate
Committees, making up more than half of the committees’ leadership
(Newton-Small, 2016)
VIII. Constraints and Bias: ​serves as a semi- counter argument, what might be the reason
there aren’t more women in government
A. Researchers Jennifer Lawless and Richard Fox determined there are seven main
barriers to women running for office, some of which include the fact that women
are much less likely than men to think they are qualified to run for office, females
are substantially more likely to perceive the electoral environment as highly
competitive and biased against female candidates, and Hillary Clinton and Sarah
Palin’s candadices aggravated women’s perceptions of gender bias in the electoral
arena (Kurtzleben, 2016)
B. As women gain seats and become a more sizeable minority within the chambers,
they are often perceived as more threatening to the status quo (Sanbonmatsu,
2015)
C. In one survey, a majority of women Senators felt their presence or way of
governing is not taken seriously (2001)
D. In 2007, a group of all men Senators met behind closed doors about a bill to
reduce the deficit and decided to cut Planned Parenthood without a hearing any
woman’s opinion, disallowing women the chance to voice their opinion on major
legislative choices (Newton-Small, 2016)
IX. The Future: ​where this will be going in the future, counters the historical and goes
full circle with the future
A. More than twice as many women are running for Congress in 2018 as they were
two years ago (Anapol, 2018)
B. At least 431 female candidates are running or likely to run in 2018, compared to
only 212 in February of 2016 (Anapol, 2018)
C. EMILY’s List has said that more than 300,000 women have expressed interest in
running for office, an overwhelming jump from the 920 who had reached out by
this point in the 2016 elections (Anapol, 2018)