Efforts are underway to close the political gender gap in the United States.

Internationally, the United States Congress ranks low for the number of women seated, with less than 17 percent of the members being women in 2011. More than 85 countries have a higher percentage of women in their national legislatures. For a country that views itself as culturally progressive in the area of women’s issues and opportunities, this figure falls short of some expectations and perceptions. In 2006, the United States Representative Nancy Pelosi of California became the first female Speaker of the House and the highest-ranking American woman in elected office. National elections in 2008 featured Hillary Clinton coming the closest ever to nomination as a presidential candidate by a major party. In the same election, Sarah Palin became the first female Republican candidate for vice president. Just two years later, many speculated that the trend would continue, and that the 2010 elections would unveil the Year of the Woman.

“It was completely not the year of the woman,” says Jennifer Lawless, director of the Women & Politics Institute at American University in Washington, D.C. “We did have a record number of women running in the primaries. But you need a record number of women running in the general election, and that was not the case. Honestly, I don’t think the pieces were in place.” Although 14 new women arrived in Washington, D.C. to serve in the 112th Congress in January, 15 departed, with many incumbent women losing their seats to men.

Lawless says the institute wants to turn things around. Founded in 2000 with a mission to close the political gender gap in the United States, the institute hopes to bring more women into political leadership. They conduct academic training and research in the field of women and politics. They also offer leadership training programs for female college students and 20-somethings hoping to climb the political career ladder. In addition, they organize special events and public forums targeting men and women of all ages, featuring prominent women on issues in politics. “We’re trying to engage people in many demographic groups,” explains Lawless, who notes the importance of engendering leadership in future generations but also engaging older women in helping to close the gap.

In her research through the institute, Lawless identifies three main issues that preclude women from choosing to run for office. First, they are busy. Even women at the highest levels of professional achievement overwhelmingly still bear the responsibilities for managing the household compared to men. This is true across generations, she asserts. “American women today are 10 times more likely to take care of the home, and 12 times more likely than men to manage the childcare. So, for women with one or two difficult jobs already, even thinking of running for office can become an unappealing third one,” she says.

For her recently published book on the issue, “It Still Takes A Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office,” Lawless and co-author Richard L. Fox surveyed over 4,000 American men and women they felt are qualified for political office. Results clearly indicate that family dynamics complicate a woman’s decision to run for office more than for a man. As one female respondent explained, “Women are busier than men, especially professional women, because once we get home from work, we have a whole second shift to do. The housework, taking care of the children.”

According to the research at American University, another reason more women aren’t seeking political office is that they are simply not being asked. “Women and men who operate in the same political circles are not equally likely to get recruited,” says Lawless. “People are more likely to tap men than women, and they tend to think of potential candidates who look like people we already have in office, and more often those are men. Currently 75 percent of our state legislators are men.” Receiving a suggestion to run for office, according to the study, has a significant impact on both a man’s or woman’s decision to consider running for office and take steps to file for candidacy.

According to Lawless, when women are asked to run, they are just as likely as men to actually run. So in her view, the most realistic way to begin closing the political gender gap is simply to recruit more women to run for office.

Finally, Lawless uncovered that women and men with equal credentials do not view themselves as equally qualified to run for public office. In fact, men are nearly two thirds more likely to self-assess as qualified to run. Ironically, the study found that these highly accomplished but modest women are also more likely than men to let their self-doubts influence their decision to run for office. And if that weren’t enough, the women surveyed were also less likely, compared to men, to think they could win if they ran for office.

Gender differences tend to decrease once a person has decided to seriously consider running. At this point, both men and women become deeply concerned about the loss of privacy one faces during the typically contentious American campaigns. However, the prospect of spending less time with family, potentially having to engage in a negative campaign, soliciting funds, and above all the loss of privacy are each at least 25 percent more likely to dissuade a woman from running than a man.

Wanted: Potential Political Candidates
Ever thought about running for office? Come to a one-day workshop to learn the ins and outs of running a campaign, fundraising, handling the media, interactive marketing and grassroots organizing. Hear about obstacles and opportunities from others who have run for office in the past. Invite friends who you think would be good candidates for local, state or federal office. Cost is $100. Box lunch provided. Women only.

The Southeastern Institute for Women in Politics is on a mission. With women comprising less than 10 percent of South Carolina’s legislature, the state ranks last of the 50 states for the percentage of women members. This is not just a gap, they say. It’s a Grand Canyon. Offering workshops such as the one described above, the institute wants to narrow the gap and give women “their rightful place among political leaders.” The election of the state’s first woman governor, Nikki Randhawa Haley, and her accession to office in January, may have narrowed the canyon.

Columbia, South Carolina businesswoman and entrepreneur Barbara Rackes, who serves on the board of the Southeastern Institute, points to the benefits women naturally bring to the political arena. She notes that traditionally, women are decision makers in the areas of education and health care for their families, so they offer a different perspective when serving in elected office. “Not that we don’t worry about roads and taxes, but in addition, women take on other issues than men do. The men don’t have babies,” she laughs. “They’re just not as naturally focused on the things that women encounter in their daily lives, managing their households and families—carpools, kids’ clothes, meals. Sure, some men do, but maybe one in 10.”

Researchers agree that a more gender-balanced governing body delivers more equal attention to issues facing women constituents. Concerns about daycare, flextime, health, gender equity, minimum wage increases, abortion and domestic violence may be viewed differently when women are at the table. For example, the Women’s Health Initiative was enacted by Congress only after female members pushed for funding for new research on women and heart disease. Previously most research had been conducted on male subjects.

“Women approach the governing process differently. Since historically we’ve never had the kind of authority that many men have had, we’ve learned to be persuasive...” Rackes says. “Women often work with volunteer groups, convincing people to share their personal energy for causes. We learn to create compromises. I think women are better at working across the aisle.”

Rackes is optimistic about Governor Haley’s interest in appointing fresh thinkers to her leadership team, including two women in her Cabinet. However, the governor is not expected to make any special effort to recruit women in particular. “Nikki is not gender centric. She didn’t run as a woman, or as a person of Indian descent. She is difficult to categorize, and while she accepts support from others such as the endorsement by Sarah Palin, she is careful about endorsing others...” says Rackes.

The Southeastern Institute hopes to make inroads for women in state leadership by creating a list of highly qualified South Carolina women for the governor to add to her selection pool. As part of the institute’s mission, the Gubernatorial Appointments Project collects names and resumés of these women to share with the new governor. “In the past, governors have said that they just didn’t have enough talented women to choose from,” Rackes explains. “They make choices for these board and commission positions based on who they know, so we want to be sure our new governor knows many qualified women. As a candidate, Nikki was enthusiastic about the idea of having the resumés sent to her, but she has also made it clear that she wouldn’t appoint a woman to a position if there were a man who was more qualified for the job.”

In an interview with a local TV news program in the South Carolina capital, Governor Haley spoke of the challenges of maintaining privacy for her children during her campaign and as the state’s first family. When asked how she would manage balancing the roles of governor, wife and mother, she responded, “The way every woman does every day. We all do this, we just have different jobs. I will tell you that we know that being a mom is a priority, and taking care of your family is first. If I know I am taking care of my family, I will be great at everything else. Michael and I have always balanced well. Even during the campaign I would take the kids to school in the morning and he was there for them at night.... We’re still going to have Haley Family Fun Nights. We’re going to make sure the kids still feel normal.”

That campaign process can be brutal for both men and women, partly due to the individualistic nature of the American political system. “In the U.S. we have a very entrepreneurial candidate emergence process,” explains Lawless, “rather than a strong party system as seen in other countries. When a party erects an entire political infrastructure, you tend to generate more women officeholders.... There are many ways to get higher numbers of women in office—but first you need female candidates, which means systematic recruitment efforts for women.”

“Even here among the 50 states, you have big differences,” she says. “In South Carolina, fewer than 10 percent of the state legislators are women, but in Arizona, Washington and New Hampshire, the state legislatures are more than 40 percent women.”

Considering the gender imbalance in the U.S. Congress, Lawless continues with a chuckle, “Really, with 435 seats in the House, I think we can probably identify 220 qualified women to fill them.

“We need to demystify the electoral process for women—there’s no bias against women on election day. Statistically, they are just as likely to win, and just as likely to raise money. Yet 80 percent of people believe there is bias against women candidates in terms of vote totals and fundraising.” Lawless concludes, “I think if we begin to address these misperceptions, more women would throw their hats in the ring.”

Jane Varner Malhotra is a freelance writer based in Washington, D.C.