Vote, sistahs!
Rachael Vorberg-Rugh
In 1912, Abigail Scott Duniway became the first woman to register to vote in Multnomah County. It was a hard-fought achievement, won after more than 40 years of campaigning for women’s right to vote. Ninety years later, in the election of 2002, 30% of Oregon’s voting-eligible women didn’t even bother to register.
Although Duniway voted in statewide elections during her lifetime, she died before the ratification of 19th amendment (85 years ago this week) gave women the vote nationwide. In honor of Duniway and her fellow suffragists, on Monday Governor Ted Kulongoski proclaimed “Women’s Equality Week” in Oregon. The announcement also marked the debut of a new organization designed to motivate women to go to the polls: Oregon Women Vote.
The project, which is funded by the NARAL Pro-Choice Oregon Foundation, aims to get at least 10,000 more Oregon women to vote in November. Events in Portland and Eugene on Monday featured former governor Barbara Roberts, PGE Foundation Executive Director Gwyneth Gamble Booth, Pink Martini singer (and distant cousin of John Forbes Kerry) China Forbes, State Senator Vicki Walker (D-Eugene), self-made business woman and local leader in women’s issues Jean Tate, and Laura Bridges, Board President of NARAL Pro-Choice Oregon Foundation.
While Oregon Women Vote is non-partisan in its approach, the presence of so many Democrats among its ranks and its NARAL backing reflects a recognition that increased voter turnout by women is more likely to benefit Democrats. The “gender gap” was a major factor in the 1996 election, when 54% of women’s votes went to Clinton and only 38% for Dole (as compared to 43% for Clinton and 44% for Dole among men). The gender gap persisted in 2000, with women voting 54% for Gore and 43% for Bush, compared to 42% for Gore and 53% for Bush among male voters (source). Female swing voters are a particularly hot topic in this year’s closely-contested election—read this AP story from the Eugene Register-Guard, for example.
There’s a certain irony here in that, both in Oregon and nationally, women are more likely to vote than men. I don’t want to give the Republicans any ideas, but it seems a get out the vote campaign for the fellas is in order. Regardless of gender, the low rate of voter registration and even lower rate of voter turnout is ridiculous and deserves attention from all quarters.
Check out these census figures for 2000 and 2002:
Year/% of eligible voters who cast ballots/% of eligible men/% of eligible women2000/60.8% Oregon, 54.7% US/58.4% Oregon, 53.1% US/63% Oregon, 56.2% US
2002/51.8% Oregon, 42.3% US/49.1% Oregon, 41.4% US/56.2% Oregon, 43% US
While women are more likely to vote than men, they are less likely to hold office—Oregon has one of the highest rankings for women in the legislature, and they only make up 27.9% of that body. Nationally, women account for 13% of the House and 14% of the Senate (source). Encouraging more women to vote is the essential first step toward encouraging broader involvement in public life, and improving women’s access to the halls of power.
For progressive women, this election has particular urgency. While the controversy over the war in Iraq is the main topic of campaign headlines, President Bush’s policies on a range of issues have particular impact on women. First and foremost, the future composition of the Supreme Court is up for grabs in this election—I’m actually surprised that no justices retired in the last four years, but more than one is likely to do so in the next presidential term. Adding one or more Bush appointees to the court would have a disastrous effect on reproductive rights. Economic and welfare policies disproportionately affect women. Although the census reports on poverty do not offer a straight comparison between rates of poverty for men and for women, it does note that “families with a female householder and no husband present made up half of all families in poverty” (source). Full-time working women continue to make less than men—the most recent census report released today tells us that such women make 76 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts, a decline of 1 cent from the previous year (and the first time there’s been a decline in that ratio since 1998). These issues are not even on the radar for the Bush administration—check out the “W stands for Women” page of his campaign website. Contrast it with the Kerry site, "Equal Opportunity for Women."
Want to do something about all this? Go to www.oregonwomenvote.com today and make your pledge to vote. I did.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Aug 26, '04
I believe some women have given up on voting because vote by mail took away their right to vote their conscience. What I mean by that is many women are dominated by their husbands, and the old system allowed them to go into a booth and vote their conscience. Today, however, the abused or dominated woman's husband is looking over her shoulder, threatening or verbally abusing her if she votes differently than he wants. The abused or dominated woman may not feel she wants to put herself through that and may simply withdraw rather than vote the way her husband wants her to vote.
Of course, many women don't vote because they're too busy juggling jobs, kids, and wifely duties to keep up with what is going on in politics. Still others are disillusioned with what is really a man's world - a place where people play hardball, break the rules, and often don't care about the everyday concerns of most Americans - except to pander to "soccer moms" at election time. Which is why it is critical that we come down HARD on those who abuse the system, lie to the public, and break the law. Otherwise, women feel like a pawn in a man's game, and choose to withdraw from it.
2:17 p.m.
Aug 26, '04
This is one of those great posts about which I have not much interesting to say. But I wanted to pump the comments number in appreciation. Good work!
Aug 26, '04
Wow. I haven't heard that particular anti-vote-by-mail argument before. Interesting.
4:13 p.m.
Aug 26, '04
I don't pretend to know what a battered and intimidated spouse goes through while voting, but I'd ask: if her vote can be coerced from her in the home during vote-by-mail, what prevents it from being coerced as they walk side-by-side into the voting booth?
What prevents a battered woman in any situation from being coerced to vote a certain way before or even after the fact?
Anyway, vote-by-mail is not going to solve in its own right the insidious problem of domestic violence, but as a voting method in and of itself, it prevents other problems that have happened at the booth, even if not here:
the elections coordinator says to you as you take your ballot, "God wants you to vote for George Bush.";
the person assigned with driving the votes to the County Elections office from a predominantly black precinct decides instead to abandon that truck behind a warehouse;
a gaggle of thugs accost you before (or after) you enter the polls, and harass and intimidate you into voting Republican;
the polling place mysteriously runs out of official ballots, even though in most places they are required to have enough to deal with 100% turnout, plus mistakes,
and one that almost certainly will happen in this election:
Look, domestic violence is a serious problem that requires an active, concentrated solution from the public at large.
But in this context, as an argument to torpedo vote-by-mail, it's just paranoid, and suggests that the writer would rather return to the times when people could exert such illegal control over the process.
Aug 26, '04
Good grief. I don't think In the Closet's intent was to argue to "torpedo vote-by-mail." And I don't think the writer was "paranoid" or was trying to make a huge statement about domestic violence.
He or she simply made a comment that perhaps some women have given up on voting by mail because they have domineering or abusive partners monitoring them at home. Makes sense to me.
I thought it was an interesting perspective.
4:58 p.m.
Aug 26, '04
Domestic abuse is a bad bad thing that crosses all demographic lines. And abused women ought to seek help, when they're ready, from service providers who focus on that issue. While domestic violence happens too frequently, it fortunately doesn't happen to a majority of women. And, as noted above, a polling place is not immune from thuggery, nor will any system of voting eradicate committed coercion.
The most recent study by UO professor Priscilla Southwell found that busy women were among those who most appreciated the convenience of vote by mail and said that it made them more likely to vote.
Hey, when women vote, women win.
Aug 26, '04
In-the-closet:
I have heard the intimidation argument used many times. I've never seen reliable documentation of that argument. I'm not suggesting it doesn't happen. I just have no idea of the frequency.
As a divorce lawyer for 20+ years I've met more than my fair share of women totally controlled by their husbands. But the frequency has dropped in the last 10 years. Why? I don't know.
As a man -- I've learned to never assume what goes through a woman's mind... but - there may be some other reasons why they don't vote.
My guesses (only):
1:49 p.m.
Aug 27, '04
There's a great website, Women's Voices. Women Vote., that focuses particularly on unmarried women voters. Here's a sample of what you'll find:
"According to the U.S. Census, unmarried women are 46 percent of all voting-age women and 56 percent of all unregistered women. As of 2000, there were 16 million unmarried, unregistered women and 22 million registered unmarried women who did not vote. If unmarried women voted at the same rate as married women, there would have been more than six million more voters in the electorate." Oh, and most of them would have voted for Gore. <sigh>
WVWV's research in Washington State in March 2004 found that unmarried women don't vote for the following reasons:
It strikes me that these reasons for not voting probably cross gender lines--and that "get out the vote" drives are only a small part of the solution to low voter registration and turnout. The public perception is that government is corrupt, unresponsive to the needs of everyday people, and too entrenched in its own beauracracy to change. Far too often, leaders prove this perception true. This is compounded by human nature--we publicize the criticism but neglect to notice when things go right (and "fair and balanced" 24/7 news cycles sure don't help). And citizens often let themselves off the hook--after all, if there's a rotten politician in office, they can (and should) be voted out.
Changing this public perception is a lot of hard work, and involves overcoming public scepticism by maintaining high ethical standards, communicating openly with the public, reaching out to under-served groups, and building a feeling of participation and responsibility among citizens. It will take political leaders who don't fight fire with fire when the nastiness starts, but instead face the public honestly and fight back with a better argument. It will take enormous effort from inviduals in government and a collective belief that we are all a part of improving our communities, our state, and this country. This election is mobilizing people to vote--in a polarized electorate that's split right down the middle, I think we'll see a pretty high turnout this time around. But to keep them voting--that's the challenge.
Aug 28, '04
Btw, Duniway's story is way more interesting than that. She also:
a) crossed the Oregon Trail, losing hir mother and boyfriend/fiance along the way
b) was a successful publisher, supporting a disabled husband
c) considered the National suffrage associations to have erred by linking temperance with suffrage, knowing it would hinder its chances of passage, esp in places like OR.
I know that's not the point of your post, but her bio is one of the most interesting among the suffragettes.
2:31 p.m.
Aug 29, '04
Duniway should be the Goddess for encouraging unmarried woman to vote in Oregon. Imagine 6 million more unmarried women voters in the 2000 presidential election. Wouldn't we be having a very different election in 2004?
John Kerry has been a supporter of NARAL for most of his political career. Take a wild risk and vote for him in 2004!
12:35 a.m.
Aug 30, '04
Husbands coercing wives over vote-by-mail is a legitimate concern. A private voting booth gives you the opportunity to vote the way you want and then lie about it. A really controlling spouse (or other harasser) might insist on seeing how you filled out your mail ballot.
However it's a hypothetical concern. I read something about post-election surveying that indicated it does not seem to be a significant problem.
That concern has to be balanced against giving busy people an opportunity to vote at their convenience, which clearly does result in many more people voting.
Voting by mail has made me a more informed voter. At our house we collect articles, endorsements, editorials, the voter's pamphlet and campaign materials. We pick an evening and gather around the dining room table and go over the ballot one race/issue at a time. We comb the materials and read the relevant bits aloud then we talk about it. Sometimes we have questions and we have someone look on the web for answers. Then each person marks their ballot however they see fit. Mostly we've all made up our minds about the high profile races and issues before we get together. However, I come out of that process knowing a lot more about local or more obscure issues than I ever did before voting by mail. I know we could have done a similar process no matter what the voting method, but the point is, we didn't. Having our ballots in hand is what got us there.
At the end of the process we either sign and stamp our ballots for mailing the next day or head for a drop-off site. Everyone in my all-female household votes, including the 21-year-old.