"Can You Be in Politics and Keep Your Integrity?"

I've traveled from Minnesota to New York, Georgia to Colorado, helping my team at The White House Project inspire, inform, and equip a diverse array of women to take the political lead. Of the nearly 1,500 women we have trained thus far, many invariably ask the above question, and it seems to me a particular injustice that they have to consider it. These women are passionate and intelligent; they have the brains and the brawn to make real change in their communities and our world. But they are cautious - they don't want to sell their soul in the process.

What a week to consider the premise. Eliot Spitzer's unfortunate and unfettered fall from grace has certainly brought issues of integrity to the foreground--but his story is, by some measure, the easier one to dismiss when it comes to the challenge of keeping our political house in order. The issue that has me more concerned, frankly, relates to some presidential campaign tactics of late and what they say to the leaders of the future about what a life in politics might mean.

As much as it has in any election to date, integrity matters this time around. At its core, political integrity is about touting policies and practices not because they are politically expedient, but because of the inherent good such policies visit upon the communities they touch. And when it comes to this question of integrity, women candidates have a particular tightrope to walk: as pollster Celinda Lake has shown us, because the traits of integrity and honesty generally have been allied with women candidates, a male opponent can almost always gain ground against a female opponent by showing a crack in her armor of so-called "goodness."

In the current race for the presidency, for instance, the criticism of Clinton for her votes, particularly on the war in Iraq, is a continual stab at her integrity. And those hits have hurt. But in this race, it's not just Clinton who is susceptible to chinks in her integrity armor. With Obama cast as the "woman" candidate he, too, runs the risk that fissures in his perceived goodness, his integrity, will impact him in ways other male candidates (those not cast as female in quite the same way) would not face.

That fact is one that will be picked up on in the general election without a doubt. But when, in this week's Newsweek, Eleanor Clift spoke so openly and eloquently about her admiration for Clinton alongside worries about her recent campaign tactics vis a vis Obama, it stirred up for me some worries of my own. Because while I believe that it is Clinton's competence and courage that account for her resurrection, I also fear that the campaign's attacks on Obama's armor are working to Clinton's benefit in a way that those of us who care about the integrity of our political system should not be thrilled about.

In the disloyal act of writing that, I hear seasoned political women's voices laughing at my "good girl," politically-disabled mentality. What are you thinking? Did you think she could win without doing these things? Have you studied this for a decade and still are this naïve? I also realize that these concerns are not about policy or about rights - they involve strategy and tactics, and as my friends remind me, we can all disagree on the latter. And, just like Eleanor Clift, I, too, am afraid I am being too hard on her, and that "what makes her a viable contender is her ability to play hardball."

But that's when I remember the young, disillusioned woman from Chicago, polled in our study "Pipeline to the Future" who lamented, "If you have values or morals, you're not going very far in politics." I hear our aspiring women leaders across the country, inquiring again about the abandonment of integrity for political gain. And I hear the diverse, talented and seasoned women politicians who answer them with candor at our trainings about how they do it. It's obvious that they compromise, but they choose how and when, just as I find is needed in any field, if not as publicly.

To be clear, this is not about holding Clinton to a higher standard than her male competitor - and frankly, given the varied and sometimes viciously misogynistic attacks Clinton has suffered through her campaign (remember those "Iron My Shirt" posters? the Hillary nutcrackers being sold in airports across the country? the inflammatory images all over the internet that depict our first viable female candidate being violated by a donkey?), the tactics being employed by the campaign right now look rather mild. Rather, it is about my wish, on behalf of young women and men alike, that at some point things will be different--that there will be models for them, of whatever gender and whatever party, who will offer resounding encouragement through their example that politics can be a fair and upright foray into changing the world for the better.

Politics - it's a tough business. There will always be leaders who profess the moral highroad and navigate, if on occasion or with regularity, the pathways which lurk beneath. More often, I hope, there will be those who will learn the art of compromise without losing their authenticity and integrity. I think of the firsts, like Senator Clinton, who will have to be tougher than even I realized to get in. I think of the pipeline of women across the country who are eager to ascend to leadership. And I hope that enough women will run for office, to change the process and well as the product, so that we can sell this business of politics to our daughters.

Comments

[KareninSM]

It cannot be said enough that the way someone campaigns is both a measure of character and an indication of the way he or she will govern. If you excuse mean and dishonest campaign tactics on the grounds that they are necessary to win, you are helping to put a mean and dishonest person in office, and you are dreaming if you think you will get an honest, open, compassionate government. If you support anger-fueled campaigns, you will get angry,divided government, like we have had since 1992.

[Chuckbutcher]

I read this article and found myself puzzled. Hillary really shouldn't have but those bad old men made her and how is a woman supposed to get ahead but it really stinks? It seems there is a beginning proposition that women are "better than that" followed by "they can't be."

I will scarcely make a claim that politics is not a male dominated field. It is what it is, but that doesn't mean that there are not nor have been some really upright campaigners who have won. I can think of little more advantage available to anyone in name recognition that Hillary has. The unfortunate part is the negative recognition brought on by Republican persecution, but that does have the advantage of covering the actual behavior that doesn't look quite so upright, taken by itself.

People (not women/men) make of politics what they will and must be held to account for it or the behaviors are encouraged. If you perceive Hillary as having violated a standard, supporting that violation means it perpetuation as a successful strategy. I'd like to vote for a woman to be the Democratic nominee, it won't be this time.

Try to remember that there is a vast difference between the actions of freelance loons and the official acts of campaigns and measure the campaigns, not the loons. Iron my shirt is not even stupidly funny, it is just plain rude, no campaign in its right mind would think otherwise. Well, I won't speak to Republicans.

[LyricalLexicon]

I didn't think that integrity and politics go together anymore. I wish that politicians were able to be successful without compromising their integrity.

[Purple Girl]

Between Hillary, Geraldine,Nancy ,Diane.....You can forget that .
I am disgusted with the females who are currently in politics (the more visible), they have acted like '50's wives. They ahve allowed th eGood ol Boys to play their games and they are serving th eBeer and snacks- Please Do Not accuse the Citizens (soem of US are actually woman) of bringing these 'poor girls' down. they have done this to themselves by their actions and INACTIONS! Hillar yis losing support becaseu she is not only playing the 'Boys'Perscribed game , but using the same dishonest tactics to win. By playing this game Hilalry has insult the female gender and what we offer to the table. WE wanted her to bring that 'other half' mentality to Round out out National discussions, view , perception. She's not bring any more - or Better - experience or decison making abilities to the Table, she's not even bring the Yin to the Yang. She's no longer battling her long time detractors or members of the 'He Man Woman Haters Club' so is now battling Us , woman who wanted a different dialogue (as usual we have a differnt view/perspective then the guys) . I would love to have a female Pres who has the insight , foresight, judgement and compassion of a Great MOM. HILLARY POSSESS NONE.

[SpaceCommand]

How exceptionally clean is Ron Paul among many candidates for the White House? All the pundits can manage to produce is some old unattended editing problems on a journal having his name. The sentiments on that were highly contrary to his peerless record in the Congress.

How great is the integrity of voting against the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security fiasco? How much gumption do you have to have to read the bills that were being foisted on the American people in the middle of an Ames strain of bacteria that was false flagged on the Congress at that time?

Do you have the treat of watching another scam that was foisted on Governor Spitzer years in advance as to make him a tool of political puppetry? The government needs strong support to eliminate interference in the sound decisions of political actors. Planted financial records smell like a singling out for "failing to obey."

This scandal business and its selective enforcement suggest only one thing, inappropriate control for financial and political advantages and the blame is far less for those who fall into these traps, than for those who create those traps.

Compare the superficial level of these "scandals," compared with those scandals that originate for highly well financed groups such as Dyncorp and other kidnap rings masquerading as no-bid suppliers for the military, and why these things including torture go totally unabated.

Our country has far greater problems that Governor Spitzer, who appears to be setup by his puppeteers, again for not "obeying," or "genuflecting," hard enough on certain issues. This is in no way by sympathy for his plight, but for a realistic view of important values here. If you see one rat, there are thousands scurrying behind the walls who will be much more "obedient," with this crack of eggs to make the omelet of political, economic, and social corruption.

You will not find much "obedience," from Ron Paul and his generally average American supporters, while you can be sure when Diebold and other voting machines have anything to do with it, you will not see his hard earned votes counted very well. The most scandal ridden figures seem to "get the votes," but surely not in fact. Do we understand why now?

[GoreyFantod]

Thank you for a thoughtful, invective-free take on the issue of integrity & elective office.

As a radical feminist, I do believe that the system is thoroughly corrupt and that successful candidates from the two major political parties are, in turn, corrupted by the system. As an African-American woman I should be thrilled about them, but I can't stomach the conservative politics of either remaining Democrat.

I've been reminded all over again of my favorite line of Audre Lorde's, "You can't dismantle the master's house using the master's tools."

[truthskr]

No doubt. I, like you, can not believe how conservative HRC and Obama are. And I can NOT believe that Obama is viewed, even within the Democratic Party, as being incredibly liberal and far left. You have to be kidding me. These are our (my Democratic Party's) offering to the moderate middle and the independent/swing voters therein, I suppose, but it does grate me as a very liberal progressive that this is what is required for the Dems to even have a shot at the White House, particularly considering the last 7 years, now going on 8, of radical right oppression and borderline facism that the US, as well as the rest of the world, has been subjected to under Bush and the rest of his NeoCon army.

And with regards to your last sentence, this is the way I feel about HRC. Her selling point of her ability to work the system after 35 years of insider "experience" does nothing to enthrall or inspire me. It just tells me that she is compliant, and therefore complicit, with a system that can not promote or engender true equality, opportunity, or critical self-examination.

[GoreyFantod]

The vomiting up of all of these long-simmering frustrations could be a positive outcome of this election. We'll never put an end to militarism and poverty if we don't confront bigotry & vice-versa.

I don't know if you're familiar with Fritjof Capra, but I often wonder if we're on the precipice of a turning point in human consciousness. The last eight years were an attempt by the military/industrial complex to erect a firewall to prevent this shift from occurring - invent a new enemy, ramp up the war machine & complete the authoritarian security state. Bush/Cheney overplayed their hand, so now we get a corporate Democrat to pacify us all over again while they continue their work in the shadows... Perhaps this is all the last gasp of a failed & dying system.

I think we all know, on some level, that the system is unsustainable. I wonder what it will look like when it falls apart and will we recognize it? I believe in education + non-violent resistance, no matter how tempting a Jeffersonian revolution feels at times. I figure I need to spend my energy on ensuring we move toward justice and away from authoritarianism.

"After a time of decay comes the turning point. The powerful light that has been banished returns. There is movement, but it is not brought about by force... The movement is natural, arising spontaneously. For this reason the transformation becomes easy. The old is discarded and the new is introduced. Both measures accord with the time; therefore no harm results."

- I Ching

[truthskr]

I am a 33 year old woman who has attending a WHP workshop and found it to be very informative, inspiring, and effective. Thank you, Ms. Wilson, for everything that you do to try to encourage women to step outside of the culturally defined confort zones and attempt to make a difference in politics and, subsequently, society in general.

I do agree that women have trouble reconciling their desire to engage politically with their desire to not relinquish their integrity, intelligence, and compassion. The political process is morally ambiguous at best, after all. But I also believe that the more women become involved in the process, the more the process will inevitably evolve, hopefully into something reflective of the idealistic motives that drive us to engage in the process in the beginning. Sure, women currently on the frontlines, in the middle of the fray, will stumble and disappoint those of us who have place all of our feminist dreams, hopes, and reputations onto them - I myself have become incredibly disappointed in, and disillusioned by, the campaign waged by Senator Clinton - but these advances, these victories, are rarely fought, and even less frequently won, without a few brave souls willing to do the dirty work necessary to secure our rightful place at the table, alongside all of the men who have already been playing this game with each other since the beginning of time.