We Need a More Diverse Government

The United States Congress is not known for being a diverse workplace. Historically, women and minority groups have not been well represented in either chamber on Capitol Hill, where white males have held a supermajority of seats in Congress. As white males have cemented and institutionalized their place in office, a recent uptick in women and minority candidates for office are challenging the old guard. The literature on the subject shows us the constraints on women/ minority office-seekers. But if we can identify the problems and structures limiting women and PoC candidates, we can work on identifying solutions.

The biggest problem preventing a more diverse Congress comes from the makeup of the old guard, composed of white males that work diligently to keep their own seats and win primary elections. By controlling district boundaries and maintaining the overarching patriarchal system in society writ large, women and minorities are less inclined to run for office. White males have strong positions in local and state legislatures, as well as wealthy connections in business, medicine, and the legal field. Furthermore, the institutionalized image of a politician being a white male has subtly deterred competitors that do not fit the stereotype. According to political scientists Fox and Lawless, women and men have different perceptions of their ability to serve well in office. Men and women can hold similar job positions, income levels, and socioeconomic status, but men are still more confident in their abilities to find electoral success, according to Fox and Lawless’ surveys. Women, albeit having the same qualifications, are less likely to believe they are suited for the job, in spite of their success in other fields.

. . .

Self-efficacy is only one barrier to entry to the national stage of politics. Ideological differences can also limit women and minorities from seeking higher office. Syracuse professor Danielle Thomsen’s article, “Why So Few (Republican) Women?” encapsulates the argument perfectly. She claims that while women are ill-represented in Congress, it is particularly bad in the GOP.

Women tend to be more moderate in state legislatures across the country. The Republican Party has become more ideologically conservative and homogeneous (meaning they think similarly), so moderates have less electoral success. Democrats are more ideologically heterogenous (meaning there’s more diversity of opinion), and moderates have a better chance of winning office in the Democratic party. When factoring in this disparity and the overall pro-woman Democratic party platform, it is easy to see why there are few more Democratic women office holders than Republican women in office. Women make up 38% of the Democratic caucus in the House, whereas only 8% of Republican House members are women (as of the 2018 midterm elections).

We know that politically ambitious people run for office if they see an open opportunity. A relatively well-known local leader typically will not challenge a powerful incumbent for their seat in the House of Representatives. If the incumbent decides to retire, then that local leader may change their mind and run for office. If they think they have a good shot at the seat, then they will capitalize on the newfound opportunity and campaign for it. Women perceive themselves as less skilled to take advantage of that opportunity because patriarchal systems have reinforced this worldview. Media always depicts politicians as white, Christian males. Expanding on Fox and Lawless’s article, the same principle is extendable to minority candidates. They will not run for office if they do not think there is a good political opening. When white males lead in fundraising and party machines, it is thus difficult for minority candidates to take advantage of the political opportunity.

. . .

Another aspect limiting women and minorities from gaining higher office comes from Congressional party platforms. Women and minorities are better represented in the Democratic party because they align better with Democratic policies. African Americans, Latinos, and other minorities typically vote Democratic instead of Republican in elections. Moderate Republican women have little opportunity because the Republican party platform does not place much emphasis on women’s issues. Thus, women and minorities really only have a viable campaign in Democratic districts (there are quite a few exceptions here, but this reasoning holds up in most circumstances). To further illustrate the problem, even if 100% of Democratic representatives were Women of Color, that would mean around 50% of Congress would be represented by women and minorities.

It is important to note that gerrymandering greatly impacts representation in Congress. Majority-minority districts are districts where the majority of the population are People of Color. If there are more majority-minority districts, there is a better chance for a higher number of minorities to win office. The flip-side of this is that it hurts women and minorities’ substantive coalition in Congress by centralizing minority voters into one district. In doing so, minority issues can run into firm conservative opposition. For example, a black representative in the South will better reflect their black constituent’s needs than a white representative would, but that would in turn reduce the substantive coalitions needed to actually adopt pro-minority policies. Think about it like this: If one district in the state is all-black, then white representatives of neighboring districts will not prioritize black voter’s preferences, as that demographic is no longer a part of their constituency.

David Lublin, a professor of Political Science at American University critiques these findings, saying that majority-minority districts are necessary for improved representation in Congress. He argues that we must account for all minorities, because our country isn’t just black and white. Latinos, Asians, and other minority groups have exploded in population over the years, and are thus changing the way that white leadership can gerrymander their districts. If we account for all minorities, how can we actually figure out the most efficient system for improving representation in the House? How can we maximize the coalition makeup of a district to improve representation while not giving up substantive policy power? Using redistricting software, it is now possible to measure this.

There are many institutional and perceived constraints that have diminished women and minority candidates from successfully winning office (even though the Democratic party has made many strides in recent years to fix this). To make a more equitable society and a more equitable Congress, we need to overcome these challenges. Institutionalized racism and sexism have prevented women and People of Color from running for office, and when they do run for office, they have a much more difficult time winning their elections.

How can we improve the number of successful women who perceive themselves as suitable for office? As suburban women pivot to the Democratic party, a natural experiment is occurring in front of us. Will the Republican party moderate its view on women’s issues, or will it stay on its current course and allow suburban women to defect to the Democrats?

Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free

The Democratic Party needs to work harder to sponsor marginalized members of our society. We, as a people, need to work harder to promote the voices of women and PoC. And the Republican Party needs to do better to heed these voices, or they will forever be relegated to defeat. If the GOP sticks to their old, white, Christian male coalition and doesn’t become more inclusive, they’re dooming themselves to lose future elections.

—

This post was previously published on Equality Includes You and is republished here with permission from the author.
—

***