More

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

GET UPDATES FROM Sue Dunlap
 

Choice Still a Winning Issue With Women Voters

Posted: 11/09/10 05:52 PM ET

On November 2, California bucked a national trend and elected pro-choice, pro-women leaders. The results from California should teach candidates around the nation an important lesson: if you want women to vote for you, you must be willing to speak honestly and directly about the issues that women care about. Contrary to what Carly Fiorina claimed during her campaign, reproductive health still matters.

Much has been made of the fact that in nationwide exit polling, Democrats lost the women's vote by just one percent. However, these nationwide numbers do not tell the whole story --there were several key statewide races in which the Democratic candidate highlighted their pro-choice credentials and won. In these races the gender gap was significantly larger, with women voters supporting the pro-choice candidates by double-digit margins. Among the candidates to tout their pro-choice credentials and win were Sen. Boxer (CA) who won the women's vote by 16 points, Sen. Murray (WA) who won women by 12 points, and Sen. Bennet (CO) who won women by 17 points.

In a number of statewide races in which women delivered a significant margin, candidates and independent organizations made choice part of the winning argument, inserting it into debates, focusing on it in paid TV ads, and hammering it home in mail and phone calls targeted at women voters. That was certainly the case here in California, where Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California educated women voters about the positions of the Senate and Gubernatorial candidates. Through mail, phone calls and radio ads, we set out to ensure that women were making informed decisions when they cast their ballots -- based on our belief that a candidate's position on access to reproductive health care matters. The results were astounding. Every night our volunteers had conversations with women voters who were disengaged and undecided -- and largely unaware of where the candidates stood on choice. Over brief conversations, minds changed quickly. Women up and down the state told us that they could never support a candidate who opposed legal access to abortion services. In the governor's race -- where Meg Whitman could only awkwardly explain her position on choice -- women voters were swayed by Brown's long-standing commitment to affordable preventive care, including cancer screenings and contraception, and teen pregnancy prevention.

Women are the primary health care decision makers in most homes -- and the majority of care that women seek is reproductive. Put simply, candidates can't pretend that they're engaging women voters without discussing health care -- and they can't pretend that they're discussing health care without addressing reproductive health. No one would claim that this is easy to do -- certainly no one at Planned Parenthood. It requires nuance, a willingness to dive into the details and, most importantly, acknowledgment that political decisions directly impact real women's lives. It shouldn't be a philosophical debate or political shorthand -- women deserve an honest conversation about access, affordability and quality that too few candidates are willing to have.

The mid-term elections are over, but it's not too late. In the best case scenario, the federal health care reforms passed earlier this year create an opportunity to have a national conversation that adequately addresses the importance of women and our health. In the worst case scenario, we'll see renewed attacks against basic access to birth control and other women's preventive health services. More than ever we'll need women's voices to sustain the victories that we've had in the Obama administration's first two years. As advocates, it is our job to create the space for and elevate this dialogue. It's never too late to begin.

 
On November 2, California bucked a national trend and elected pro-choice, pro-women leaders. The results from California should teach candidates around the nation an important lesson: if you want wome...
On November 2, California bucked a national trend and elected pro-choice, pro-women leaders. The results from California should teach candidates around the nation an important lesson: if you want wome...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 39
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:19 AM on 11/15/2010
why women love this gross procedure is beyond me.. I guess they are sociopathic or something to be so carefree about terminating a life. I guess they must think of it like having a wart removed so they can sleep at night
photo
Debbie Shoemaker
bleeding heart and proud of it
05:19 PM on 11/10/2010
In Missouri, they passed a law which requires a woman to wait 24 hours after counseling to continue with the abortion procedure. Considering that there are very few abortion providers in Missouri, located around the metro areas, rural women are required to drive long distances to receive counseling, go home, and come back. Why? Because some lawmakers thought it would change minds? If a woman has made the commitment to go to the abortion clinic then her mind is pretty set and the 24 hour thing is just another control measure meant to keep the women in line.
My proposal is this...every male who gets "excited" must receive counseling then wait 24 hours before being able to "relieve" any pressure. I know it sounds a little evasive, kind of "big" government but consider the reduction in abortions if men had to have counseling and a 24 hour waiting period. It's time that men were held to account because there would be no abortion without men.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sanityisneeded
No one said it was going to be easy.
12:18 PM on 11/10/2010
Calif is not representative of all America. It is interesting that NOW is not representative of all women - they are Democrats and mostly very liberal. Not all women vote solely on women's issues. We should be voting for people who we can trust, not solely for special issues - that is what is dividing our country. Blacks are chastised for not voting for Democrats by Democrats. Unions do not want potential union workers to have the freedom to vote in private - they would prefer coersion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nabsentia23
Practical Idealist
01:58 PM on 11/10/2010
Coersion, huh?

The right wing knows all about coersion.

I am a woman and I certainly don't vote solely on women's issues, but why are you targetting your comments towards the left? How about the anti-abortionists who only vote for anti-abortion candidates without looking at anything else? Isn't that voting solely for a special issue? And what about that McDonald's manager who told his employees that they wouldn't get raises until they voted Republican?
photo
Debbie Shoemaker
bleeding heart and proud of it
06:10 PM on 11/10/2010
Don't forget ACORN...BOO
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
06:23 PM on 11/10/2010
You do realize that ACORN was cleared of wongdoing, don't you?
www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/06/preliminary-report-clears-acorn/ -
photo
sedc72
4th Gen. Vet., DC Native
05:01 AM on 11/10/2010
If that's the case, please explain to me WHY so many women voted for ANTI-WOMAN repubs, who clearly said that they were anti-choice?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
THETINGLYONE
09:19 AM on 11/10/2010
and how is standing up for the unborn ANTI - woman?

The vast, VAST majority of women in this country are against abortion on demand, third trimester abortions and partial live birth abortions,,,,most MOST GOP stand for exceptions in cases of health of the mother , rape and incest ,,,,,
The pro abortion crowd however are adamant in their stance on termination of unborn
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
lifeofthemind
10:08 AM on 11/10/2010
There are much more effective ways of standing up for the unborn than making invasive laws.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nabsentia23
Practical Idealist
01:43 PM on 11/10/2010
The anti-abortion movement is nothing about a ruse for a GOP more concerned about deregulation. Considering that the GOP has been dominant on the national scene for 30 years, they had plenty of time to make it illegal, but didn't.

And despite what you say, the VAST majority of Americans still believe in access to abortion, but with some restrictions.
12:54 PM on 11/15/2010
Because a lot of voters are ignorant, just because some of them are women doesn't change that fact.
12:10 AM on 11/10/2010
Excellent article! Groups such as NARAL and Emily's List played enormous supporting roles in defeating right wing anti-choice extremists all across the nation this election season, as well. Through the increased implementation of technology and social networking, supporters of the rights and interests of women are crossing not only geographical lines, but also traditional markers of gender, race, religion, economic class and political persuasion. Women and their advocates can expect to be THE force to be reckoned with in the coming elections.
10:06 PM on 11/09/2010
Gee, I thought the GOP just trounced the Dems. I guess those women who voted GOP haven't heard how Republicans talk about choice.
12:56 PM on 11/15/2010
I guess, if by "trounced" you mean they took a slim majority in the House and still do not control the Senate or the White House - stop listening to FAKE NEWS all the time, you might learn something. As we have seen over the last 20 years or so, the House is pretty much irrelevant anyway.
photo
Debbie Shoemaker
bleeding heart and proud of it
09:28 PM on 11/09/2010
Here in Missouri, in a state senate race, the Democrat was touting his "pro-life" record. Now I really liked this senator, I had spoken to him on several occasions and he seemed a thoughtful man. I did look up his voting record and he has voted for measures that reduced abortion availability and basically made it harder for women to access a legal medical procedure. On election night, I did not register a vote for state senate. I could not vote for the Republican and I could not vote for this man who believes in his heart that I am not able to make the most personal decision on my own but requires his "wisdom" in determining the direction of my life. The Democrat lost re-election and I am not sad about it because he was no better than the hypocritical so called "pro-life" Republicans. Politicians really need to take into account their stances on choice because by being anti-choice, they are admitting that women are not "qualified" or "capable" to make one of the biggest decision of their lives.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
outsidethemainstream
11:51 AM on 11/10/2010
already fanned U. wish I could fan U again.

in Louisiana, we have the same problem w/ conservadems. It's really depressing. I wish women all around the country would embrace liberation.
photo
Debbie Shoemaker
bleeding heart and proud of it
06:31 PM on 11/10/2010
Thanks...fanned back:)
06:55 PM on 11/09/2010
My only hope is that politicians on both sides of the aisle take notice. We hear so much about choice not being the rallying cry that it once was with women voters but, in truth, it's as important as ever.
10:56 AM on 11/10/2010
If abortion was important to voters then Democrats would never win elections. According to most every poll I have seen only 35-40% of people think that abortion should be generally available. 60-65% of people think that there should be strict limits or that it should be illegal. Abortion is something that as people think about it and examine it more they get more and more against it.

Here is a link to a couple polls

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nabsentia23
Practical Idealist
01:53 PM on 11/10/2010
Actually, you could read that same poll as saying 75% want abortion available or available with stricter limits and 25% don't want it available at all.

Besides, these figures have fairly consistent over several years and really don't show any real change of support for either the pro-choice or anti-abortion camps.

Anyway, the anti-abortion movement is a ruse for conservatives more concerned with deregulation. Abortion is a wedge issue that convinces people to vote against their economic interests...end of story. Maybe if economic conditions improved then the incentives to get abortions would decrease? Or maybe if contraception was more readily available, then the need for abortions would also decrease? But, as usual, the anti-abortion movement doesn't think along these lines. It would just make too much sense.

The anti-abortion movement is so busy being concerned about the lives of the unborn that they could care less about making the lives of the born better (including themselves).