Jill Miller Zimon is one of WCF’s MsRepresentation bloggers in the final weeks of the 2010 election.
Last week, MsRepresentation covered the issue of women, philanthropy and breaking the glass piggy bank. To recap, studies show that women give more than men when it comes to traditional philanthropy.
But when it comes to political donations, men’s contributions far exceed those of women, and even when women do give, it appears that they give more to male candidates than female! You can see more on this data at WCF’s Vote With Your Purse.
What will it take for women to realize the power they have?
For one, the creation of efforts such as the Women Under Forty PAC (WufPAC) and The Mother PAC in Oregon. Through such organizations, we can support candidates and issues that matter to us and to all women: gender parity in elected office and the pursuit of work-life policies that benefit all Americans
But even more generally, there are causes of all kinds that have political action committees to which we can contribute and make a difference, such as WCF PAC, where 100% of your donation goes directly to WCF-Endorsed women candidates who support reproductive health choices.
And this is why women seriously should consider how much we have yet to give and look to the motivation behind an idea initiated more than two years ago by Joanne Bamberger via PunditMom’s $27 Election Revolution:
Several months ago, I read Melinda Henneberger’s book, If They Only Listened to Us: What Women Voters Want Men to Hear.
As she was promoting her book, Henneberger quoted a statistic in one article that if every woman who voted in the 2006 national elections had contributed just $27 to any presidential candidate or party, we would pour $1.3 billion dollars into the political system.
Mm-hmm. That’s billion with a ‘b.’
That’s an amazing amount of money, and beats out by a very long distance even the “secret” money that concerns so many of us. Joanne got going:
Starting today, I’m launching PunditMom’s $27 Election Revolution.
I’m asking each of you to think about cutting back on the Starbucks just a little bit and contribute $27 to the candidate or political party of your choice. It doesn’t have to be John McCain or Barack Obama. It doesn’t even have to be a presidential candidate -- there are plenty of candidates running for national and local offices who could use a little extra cash to get out their messages.
If we pool our money, so much the better. But imagine what our $1.3 billion dollars would do, even as individual contributions, to increase the volume of our political voices. Even John McCain would have to sit up and take notice of the issues we think are important.
Still worried about your money will just get used in ways you wouldn’t approve? I know how you feel. Just after the 2006 elections, I asked the Ohio Democratic Party and Ohio Republican Party chairs what we can do about negative campaigning. Chris Redfern, the ODP chair responded by saying, if you don’t like the ads, don’t give the people who pay for them the money.
But why can’t we reverse that? What if we used our pocket power to influence and incentivize campaigns we like and campaigns we’d like to see? If you think they don’t exist, consider this one from U.S. Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD). No name-calling, no nasty images, no gimmicks. Just the candidate’s voice and own words. Convincing and clean.
If women want change, we need to find ways to promote that change. Making monetary political donations is one very powerful way not only to promote the change we want, but to show support for those people who exemplify the change we want to see – on the campaign trail and in office. We can set this challenge, and meet it. And we should.
Have a hot news tip for MsRepresentation? Email us at tipforMsRepresentation@gmail.com.
Follow @WCFonline on Twitter.
Be the first in the know: Sign up to receive MsRepresentation’s Daily Brief via email.
