The Republican Party has been rightly brutalized for trying to reopen aspects of the so called culture wars that many thought to have been resolved 35 to 40 years ago - the availability of contraception being but the most notable. And this Neanderthal Christianist approach has rightly alienated many women voters. But an article in Forbes argues that the GOP's stone cold heart and "let's take care of the rich" approach to economic issues is also fueling the wide gender gap in preferences for a presidential candidate. Here are some article highlights that ought to send a message to those in the GOP who seek to destroy the social safety net:
The blogosphere was abuzz last week after polling numbers from USA Today/Gallup came out showing Obama with a 18-point lead over Romney with women in swing states. Many leapt to the conclusion that the more than a month-long fracas over birth control – when and how it should be covered, as well as whether it is bad in the first place – has turned women off of the Republican platform.
But in a forum on women’s economic concerns on Friday, President Obama stated what has become a new campaign refrain of late: “Women are not some monolithic bloc. Women are not an interest group.” And as he put it even more simply a few weeks back: “I’m not somebody who believes women will be single-issue voters.” Indeed, he’s right. Women care deeply about accessing contraception (sorry, Nikki Haley), but that’s not the only issue they vote on – and it’s not necessarily the main driver of the widening gender gap between Republicans and Democrats.
It’s likely that the squabbling over contraception and reproductive rights has “really galvanized women,” Celinda Lake, president of polling firm Lake Research Partners, told me. Unmarried women and younger women weren’t even paying attention, yet their interest has jumped 20 points, she said. But now that the politicians on both sides have their attention, they don’t like what they see when it comes to economic issues. It’s “a question of priorities,” Lake said. “These women feel that it’s tough economic times out there, my family’s in trouble, this country’s in as big trouble as it’s been in generations, young people having a very hard time, Rome is burning, and you’re focused on my birth control?”
Interestingly enough, economics, not so-called “social issues” like reproductive rights, has historically played a large role in the gender gap. . . . Women overall tend to support what the authors call “compassion issues” like welfare, education, and healthcare, and are therefore more supportive of increased social spending in bad times. The gender gap increases when domestic spending becomes more liberal because “[a] policy change that might be seen as too liberal for the average man might seem like the correct amount of spending to the average woman,” the authors sate. Women are voting to increase economic support for those who most need it while men lose their appetite for spending in tough times.
When it comes to Obama’s policies, “Women tend to think he’s much more in touch with their families and the middle class,” she said. “They do think the government should be a partner… not just in the safety net but in getting the economy going.” Why would women be more supportive of spending on social programs? The authors of the study answer, “Men tend to be less economically vulnerable than women, and they are less pessimistic than women about the economy.” Women know what it is to struggle to make ends meet, even in good times.
This is not to ignore the economic side of contraception, either. Women support co-pay free birth control because it has such a huge impact on their bottom lines – and their ability to work at all. But to say that women are fleeing the Republican Party based solely on this issue is to ignore the role the economy at large will have in the upcoming election. Women aren’t single-issue voters, and if the GOP wants to woo some of them back, it’ll have to take a hard look at a lot of its policy priorities.
No comments:
Post a Comment