Where are the Women? To President-Elect Obama from the National Council for Research on Women

As President-elect Obama meets with his top advisors and begins to build his leadership team for a new administration, we hope he will show a little gender sensitivity and recruit significant numbers of women to key positions. Here is the open letter I wrote that was published in Alternet earlier this week.

Obama's Cabinet Should Be Half Women

By Linda Basch, AlterNet. Posted November 10, 2008.

Dear President Obama,
The confetti has fallen. The pundits have quieted. And now it is time to get down to the business of rebuilding trust in our nation both at home and abroad.

As you roll up your sleeves and consult your most trusted allies about creating a team to take this country into a more secure future, I ask you to keep something in mind: the interests of the women who played such a decisive part in your election.

That means, first and foremost, making sure that your cabinet reflects the demographic of this country. It seems only fitting, after an election with such an unprecedented presence of serious, female power that you would pledge to assemble a more gender-balanced team. There are so many women leaders poised to step into cabinet positions right now -- women heads of universities, military leaders, ranking experts in the State department, in law, advocacy, and business and in the legislatures and governors' mansions across this country.

I ask this, not in the spirit of quotas or as some sort of consolation prize, but because I know that having a diverse cabinet is not only fair but good for the country; we need the most diverse perspectives, the most developed expertise, the most innovative thinkers. If you don't draw from half the population, how can you possibly create the most capable and enlightened government?

It also seems fitting that you would make this pledge -- as have others, like Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero from Spain and President Michelle Bachelet from Chile -- because of the historic nature of your own biography. As our first African-American president and with your international experience, you know the power of broadly representative leadership. Appointing a gender-balanced cabinet would be a bold first move in confirming your commitment to genuine change we can believe in.

I recognize that you are under a tremendous amount of pressure just now. The agenda is ballooning and the dollars are shrinking. The economy hasn't been this bad, as you yourself have said, since the Great Depression. We're in the thick of two seemingly unending wars. As you translate your uplifting campaign words into transformative actions, you will be facing a challenge of proportions not seen since Franklin Delano Roosevelt first wheeled into the White House.

You've got a lot on your presidential plate... which is why the insights of highly qualified women leaders are going to be critical in the days ahead. We have so long thought of "women's issues" as the so-called soft ones -- work/family policy, healthcare, education. These all top the lists of women's concerns, but polls show that the economy, foreign policy, and the environment are equally important to women.

When I look back at your senatorial leadership, your teaching and community organizing before that, it seems that you have always sought to deal with issues without confining them to a racial, class or gender perspective; you deal in shared challenges and community-based solutions, personal responsibility and unabashed interdependence, privileging -- not degrees and demographics -- but the best ideas and the most ethical thinkers. Your style -- collaborative, open-minded, sometimes called "feminine" -- certainly is a sign of the changing times.

I only ask that if you absorb so-called "women's issues" into the rest of your agenda, that you don't lose sight of them. Women in this country are terrifically vulnerable right now. We are disproportionately affected by the failing economy -- more likely to be in foreclosure and hold sub-prime mortgages (32% more likely than men despite better credit scores), more likely to be poor, earning minimum wage (68.4% nationally), and to lack adequate health insurance. We still earn less than men, still suffer from domestic violence, still struggle to meet our most basic reproductive health needs. These challenges are not unique to women, they affect families, communities, and the nation.

We are disproportionately vulnerable, but we are not victims. In fact, we have never been so poised to play a key role in transforming this nation -- and our fellow citizens are ready for this change. A recent Pew survey showed that a vast majority (69 percent) of the public thinks that men and women make equally good leaders. They also ascribed special leadership characteristics to women including honesty, intelligence, and capacity for hard work.

As a proud son, husband, and father of powerful women, I know you need little convincing that women should play a leading role in this transformation.

And, of course, congratulations.

Sincerely,

Linda Basch, PhD, President, National Council for Research on Women

Comments

[Jacki Zehner - Huffpost Blogger]

Linda thank you for writing this letter. I always read the entry, then read all the comments, then read the entry again. Doing that illuminates the issues raised that are the hot buttons. It is clear that most of your readers care deeply, as they should, that the President elect picks the 'best' people. They are concerned that you are suggesting that a woman who is not the 'best' gets a plum job just to make his team diverse. The key question is what makes people the best? It is at the end of the day subjective. I accept as truth that having the 'best' leadership that is ALSO diverse leadership, is the best model, and the one to which President Elect Obama should aspire.

[GregJL]

Obama's cabinet should be made up completely of people who can best do the job for which they will be hired, regardless of race, creed, color, sex, or sexual orientation. Period, end of story.

[fem56]

They are going to complain. Face it. Please Obama. chose the best people. I will betcha (thank's S. Palin) that most women care more about the future of the country than quotas. If there are plenty of women that can step into the positions on day one show him and he can decide if he is comfortable with any of your choices. Otherwise enough already.

[fem56]

Yes; and how about Buddists and Muslims being represented in fair numbers as well as gay and lesbians. I can think of a lot of groups who want to be recognized. Obama has a big enough job without having to worry about such as whether his staff is well qualified, rightly experienced, has his backside, supports him, etc. Please Obama tune all these interest groups out and chose someone you are really comfortable with. The country is depending on you.

[bascombe]

did they openly support Obama?

NO!!!!!!!!!!

[rixter1965]

PS...

I'm not so sure that raiding the Senate for important posts in the Obama administration is the best idea. Isn't the point -- once outstanding races are decided -- to get as close as possible to 60 to best that silly super-majority rule?

Senator McCaskill did work tirelessly for Obama's election, but might not she have a really important role to play amid the Democratic majority in the Senate? Why I'm baffled by looking for qualified people regardless of their age, race, ethnicity, or gender from among Democratic Senators...

[rixter1965]

Let's see...

President-Elect Obama has announced a Chief of Staff. Nothing official about his White House Staff; nothing official about his Cabinet. Maybe it's a little early to criticize a paucity of women (or lack of diversity) in either.

"W" had more women and minorities than any previous administration on his senior staff and in his Cabinet -- and we know how that worked out!

I'm happy to see that the new Congress will have more women Senators and Representatives than ever before (thanks to Democrats, GOP numbers will drop).

Let's give the President-Elect a little time to make his choices before jumping to any conclusions.

[Livvy]

It seems a bit premature to berate Obama for lack of women in his administration at this point. To my knowledge the sum of appointments made so far are his Chief of Staff and two top aides (one of which is a woman). His people have said that the Dept. of State job is Hillary's if she wants it.

That looks like a pretty promising start to me. He has hundreds of jobs to fill and I doubt very much that women will be left out. I have seen diversity in every thing else he has done and think he can be trusted to choose the best and brightest from all sorts of backgrounds and perspectives.

[boing007]

While I support Senator Obama bringing women in on his cabinet, and am a strong supporter of women's rights and equality, I cannot and will not support the idea that he should make an effort to create any kind of 'even representation' of women simply for the sake of gender equity, or even for the sake of equal representation.

Fine. One could also pretend that there already are more qualified women out there than men. If that's the case, then by all means President-Elect Obama's team should go out and find them. Why not all women in his cabinet if there are more qualified women out there than men? That's not affirmative action, that's being smart.

[VoteforPedro]

Can the professional feministas ever stop whining?

[Spud777]

Linda: I know what I am talking about due to my career! I saw unqualified "minorities" take jobs they were not the best person available because of quote’s . While I am all for diversity, I am not for diversity for diversity's sake. Nobody benefits’ from incompetent people getting jobs due their ethnic/minority status. Everyone suffers when that happens.

[HJF1968]

spud777, your comment is very one sided here. If you want to talk about quotas, this country has historically had a quota system that was geared towards whites. There have been a lot of qualfied minoritiesthat were passed over for jobs they were qualified for because of their skin color. Those jobs were instead given to unqualfied "whites". When you talk about quotas, you need to look at both sides. Affirmative action was intended to level the playing field because employers(mainly white) left to their own devices continued to discriminate against minorities. During the early 1900s, the govt set up housing loans policies that were favorable towards whites and disenfranchised blacks and other minorities. Sometimes statements like "the best available person" is used to subtly discriminate against minorities and women.

[Simone]

The 'problem' is that there are a wealth of qualified candidates for Obama to pick from. If he selects mostly men, then he reflects the thinking of people like Spud who seem to assume that if there are 20 positions available that there are only 20 qualified and competent people to fill them. Obama has thousands of competent and qualified people to select from. He could fill the cabinet with all white men, all white women, all black women, all Asian women, all Asians, etc, and we can assume they are competent and qualified. However, such a selection would not be in the best interest of the country because it would so obviously ignore the diversity of talent in this country, some of which has been historically underrepresented.

The writer has read the same papers and blogs we have and a red flag went up. She's is attempting to put a bug in Obama's ear that she represents an important viewpoint. And she does.

[quiviran]

Obamas election was about his qualifications and abilities. To suggest selection of members of his administration on the basis of any criteria other than qualification and ability is to diminish the importance of his election, not just for Obama, but for everyone who voted for him. Just as race should not have been a factor in voting for Obama ( or against him), plumbing should not be a job consideration. There should be no judgement of selection too many or too few women, as long as the most qualified people are selected.

[happytrails]

Thank you for articulating a long-overdue truth. I personally think that if it had been up to WOMEN, we would have been saddled with Clinton as the nominee and probably would have lost the election, not to mention listening to her old, tired, center-right rhetoric. As it is, we have elected the most intelligent and inspiring person to run for president in my memory. I'm a 70 yr. old woman, btw.

[Rmtns]

Chromosomes or secondary sex characteristics are not qualifications to be a senior member of ANY team. Get over quotas, let's get the most qualified people in to senior government positions, no matter the color of skin, religion, sex or political party. Let's leave the Bush legacy behind.

[NewDem08]

"Get over quotas, let's get the most qualified people in to senior government positions, no matter the color of skin, religion, sex or political party."

Well said, Rmtns. Having the best people is SO MUCH MORE important than having some arbitrary politically correct mix.

(For the record, I'm a white middle-aged female who voted Dem for the first time this year so I could vote again Clinton in the primary.)

[ReadyNow]

Identity politics and quotas are OVER.....half women? Get your job the hard way....earn it...don't get one based on being the best in s certain category...that is so... Bill Clinton.....Do we really have to suffer through anothe Bill Clinton AG search?

[TheSojourner]

I fully support feminism, but I think Obama should choose the best person for the job, regardless of gender. Gender is not the issue. Do the names Harriet Miers and Sarah Palin ring a bell? Of course, the biggest incompetents currently, I think, are George W. Bush, followed in rapid (or maybe vapid) succession by Cheney and Rummy (gone but not forgotten), definitely all males. As I was saying gender isn't the issue.