iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Stephanie Schriock

GET UPDATES FROM Stephanie Schriock
 

Get Talking

Posted: 07/13/2012 9:16 am

Seven out of ten. Nearly seven out of ten independent women voters see the Ryan Budget's cuts to programs that support women and families as reason not to vote Republican. That is a huge number, but it hinges on the fact that women voters are educated on the issues that are at stake this election. At EMILY's List we know the key to creating a more progressive America is to involve more women in politics, as candidates and as well-informed voters.

If equal pay is important to you, it's important to your mother, your sister and your daughter. If having access to health insurance and the ability to make your own healthcare decisions is important to you, it's important to your aunt, your niece and your grandmother. We need women to be having conversations about how Republicans are threatening key legislation like the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Affordable Care Act every day.

The more women voters learn about the anti-woman agenda of the right, the more likely they are to support Democratic candidates. We recently finished up the second set of research in our Women's Monitor, which surveyed nearly 1,000 independent women voters in battleground states. And we found that when those women learned just a few details about Republican efforts to block the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, 71% of them said it was a convincing reason not to vote Republican. That is 71% of a crucial voting bloc this election, one that could and most likely will cast the deciding votes in November.

Women know that it isn't fair when the man working next to them -- doing the same job -- takes home a bigger paycheck. But they also need to know who in Congress is on their side on these issues. They need to know that Democratic women are fighting against inequality every day.

Women across this country need to recognize their role in the democratic process -- not only are they voters, but they can be a valuable and powerful campaign resource. I challenge women to recognize that in themselves.

To the women reading this, I say: you know people. People trust you. You're a leader -- in your family, your workplace, your community. So talk. Talk to your daughter, your sister, your aunt, your co-worker in the cubicle next to you, the other parents you see at the soccer games. Tell everyone about the impact of the Republican agenda. And tell everyone that we need to elect more great Democratic women, women who know what it's like to walk in their shoes and who will fight for their values, and you need their help.

And to the men reading this -- you have at least a mother, and likely a sister, aunt, daughter and colleague that needs to hear that you care about this too.

And if you're looking for the candidates to support, EMILY's List has them. We have a record 11 women running for the Senate and one of our most impressive fields of House candidates in our 27-year history. So get informed, get talking and get ready to make a real change in November.

 

Follow Stephanie Schriock on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Schriock1

FOLLOW POLITICS
Seven out of ten. Nearly seven out of ten independent women voters see the Ryan Budget's cuts to programs that support women and families as reason not to vote Republican. That is a huge number, but i...
Seven out of ten. Nearly seven out of ten independent women voters see the Ryan Budget's cuts to programs that support women and families as reason not to vote Republican. That is a huge number, but i...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:56 PM on 07/16/2012
Don't talk about the republican agenda with your co-worker in the next cubicle unless you want to risk getting fired. Three things that can get you in trouble for discussing at work: sex, money, and politics.
03:19 PM on 07/13/2012
I honestly don't think the Obama campaign thinks that women can understand a first amendment discussion if reproductive rights are in any way involved. Further, it seems to me to be a lack of respect to believe that women do not understand the difference between leveling the playing field and leveling the outcome - where woman's pay is tangentally the subject (given there were already two laws in place mandating equal pay for equal work.) Aren't you ladies a little upset with this condesending manipulation?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:01 PM on 07/16/2012
What does this have to do with the Obama administration? He's not the one who keeps bringing it up! The right is.

I'm more upset with your need to manifest this supposed condescending manipulation.
01:15 PM on 07/13/2012
Women's 77 cents to men's dollar -- "proof" of discrimination -- is arrived at by comparing the sexes' median incomes: women's median is 77 percent of men's. In 2009, the median income of full-time, year-round workers was $47,127 for men, compared to $36,278 for women or 77 percent of men's median. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/217/womens-earnings-and-income

Median income is defined as: 50% of workers earn above the figure and 50% below. Think about what this means: A lot of female workers in the higher ranges of women's median make more money than a lot of male workers in the lower ranges of men's median.

Moreover, “women's 77 cents to men's dollar” doesn't account for the number of hours worked each week, experience, seniority, training, education or even the job description itself. It compares all women to all men, not people in the same job with the same experience. So the salary of a 60-year-old male computer engineer with 30 years at his company is weighed against that of a young first-year female teacher. Also, men are much more likely than women to work two jobs; hence, more often than women, a man earning $50,000 from two jobs is weighed against a women earning $25,000 from one job, so that he appears to be unfairly earning twice as much as she.

“The Doctrinaire Institute for Women's Policy Research”
http://wp.me/p10VSC-oC
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Allen Clark
05:53 PM on 07/13/2012
Well that pretty much tells us how you math works 50% are above and 50% are below. That means 0% are medium. My math is a bit different. the majority of the women hold the higher income postions and are on the minority list so they get favored over men for those jobs they apply for. Women dominate certain occupations and do not even try and compete for the lower income because they know they have a better chance of competing in the higher bracket. That means you statistics are compromised because of the job levels and not necessarily even when it comes to the opportunities. The White male is the only ones that are not on the minority list, so that should make us the true minorities.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:04 PM on 07/16/2012
Oh...my...god...

The day has finally come when white men are shouting that they're the "true" minorities. Let me tell you something, friend. When your group, in this case white males, are the ones in POWER, you cannot be a minority. Period. Get it? Absolutely ridiculous. Not to mention, everything you said is grossly inaccurate. Women make up the majority of the work force and are NOT typically in positions of power. Men are. My god, please go learn something not on GBTV.