Authors |
A Gender Divided: Women as Voters in the 2000 Presidential Election
The perennial gender gap leads many commentators and activists to make claims about how women win elections for Democrats, defining them as base voters similar to urban residents or union members. But the data shows the "women's vote" is much more complicated. The clearest gender issue revealed in this election is that women are much less solid in their allegiance to the Democrats than the men who support Republican candidates. If it were not for the 94% of African American women who supported AI Gore, he would have lost women by one point. Looking at white voters demonstrates this most clearly -60% of white men supported Bush, while 48% of white women supported Gore. Moreover, white women voters were shaky throughout the election, only returning to the Democratic fold late in the campaign. Women's support for Gore rose to dizzying heights after the Democratic convention, only to erode severely in the debate period. According to surveys conducted for Democracy Corps, Gore garnered a nine-point advantage among white women by the end of September, which declined to a four-point disadvantage by mid-October. Most white men, on the other hand, never seriously considered the Gore candidacy. Bush's 25-point lead among white men in September persisted throughout October and election day. What these election returns also reveal is that the differences among women voters are far more interesting and important than the differences between men and women. Certainly there is a vast gap among women of different races, but religiosity, region, urbanity, and class divide women as well. Like male voters, women's political choices are rooted in their particular life experiences and group loyalties, which create considerable political diversity when it comes to electoral politics. Last year, Gore and Bush split white women voters nearly evenly, though both candidates fared better or worse with particular groups of female voters. For example, Gore garnered record support among college-educated women, while Bush made Republican gains with young and high school-educated women. A Gender Divided The differences among women voters in the 2000 presidential election reflect larger divisions in American politics. Traditionally African Americans, Jews, white working class and Southern voters, and ethnic Catholics held the Democratic coalition together. Over the past 30 years, however, we have seen the decline of white Southern and working class support for Democrats, especially among white male voters. On the other hand, since 1980, Democratic presidential candidates have been able to rely on the loyalty of minority voters, socially liberal women, and senior citizens. Since the late 1970s, Republicans cobbled together a similarly disparate coalition of affluent voters and rural, socially conservative, religious citizens, who supported the successful candidacies of Ronald Reagan and George Bush. White male voters remain solidly in the Republican camp, with no Democratic candidate garnering more than a third of the white male vote since 1980. Furthermore, the Republicans continue to make inroads with white ethnic Catholics and working class voters. Among women voters, the 2000 election did not witness any substantial changes in these fault lines. Gore found his strongest support among African American women, college-educated women, single women, and elderly women, while Bush performed best among religious women, Southern women, and married women. This year, however, young women and women without a college education were swing voters, meaning they were fairly evenly split between the candidates and vacillated between the Democratic and Republican camps during particular campaign moments such as the Democratic Convention and the debates. As the Voter News Service (VNS) exit polls show, Gore won about half of high school-educated and young women, representing a four- to five-point decline for a Democratic candidate. Among white voters, moreover, Bush made inroads with working class women. According to a post-election survey conducted for the Insti- tute for America 's Future (IAF), Bush won white non-college women by seven points and young, white non-college women by nine points. (See Table 1.) In some respects, these results are surprising. We would expect downscale and working-class women to be more supportive of Democratic candidates than affluent and educated women, given the Democratic Party's positions on economic issues and social policy.4 As many scholars argue, the gender gap is rooted in women 's liberal views about the role of government in people's lives. Generally, women are more likely than men to set priorities such as spending on education, healthcare, and retirement, and women favor an active government role in maintaining the social safety net.5 These economic views bind women to the Democratic Party and generate gender differences in electoral politics. But in the 1990s, Democratic candidates struggled with white working-class women, while gaining ground with college-educated women.6 In particular, Democrats took a major hit in the 1994 congressional elections, though Clinton was able to regain some ground in the 1996 presidential race. Between the 1996 and 1998 elections, however, the Democratic share of the congressional vote fell from 58% to 52% among high school-educated women, while it rose among college women by three points. We see similar erosion at the presidential level. Gore won 50% of women with some college education and 52% of women with a high school education compared to 57% of college-educated women. This represents a four-point decline among high school women since 1996. Gender, Class, and “Family Values" The fact of the matter is that Gore fared best with secular women, single women, and collegeeducated women while Bush found favor with religious women, married women, and women without a college education. This reflects both the enduring power of cultural issues in electoral politics and the centrality of values in the most recent election. Since the 1970’s, the parties have been polarized over cultural issues such as abortion, feminism, the Equal Rights Amendment, sexuality, and gay rights.7 At the moment, Democrats are clearly associated in the public's mind with liberal positions on these issues, while the Republican Party remains the guardian of "family values."8 These issues drive a wedge between women as well- generally, highly educated and secular women adopt more feminist and pro-choice views, while less educated and more religious women are more socially conservative.9 Not surprisingly, for some women, these conflicts strongly influenced electoral choices throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Values played an important role in the last presidential election. We saw hints of the importance of the values debate when socially conservative women dropped off from the Democrats in 1998; high school women fell from 58% to 52%, married women dropped from 49% to 46%, and women over 60 years of age fell from 52% to 48% -a clear reflection of the impeachment scandal. In fact, Gore started at a disadvantage in the values climate of the election. According to the exit polls, three-quarters of voters who said the Clinton scandals were very important or somewhat important (44% of electorate) voted for Bush. Post-election surveys clearly demonstrate that despite the strong economy and Gore's advantage over Bush in policy areas such as healthcare, prescription drugs, and Social Security, character, leadership, and values played a role in working class women's voting decisions. When asked what motivated their sup- port for the candidates, white working class women were far more likely to cite values and leadership than white college-educated women. For example, the IAF study compared two hypothetical statements made by the candidates in which Gore emphasizes economic issues such as "tax cuts for education and childcare," while Bush concentrates on values such as "personal responsibility" and "accountability" (see below). Comparing Gore's populist message to Bush's values message, white non-college women were nearly twice as likely as white college women to strongly agree with Bush's notion of respecting the values of middle class families. Overall, 31% of white non-college women in the IAF survey cited Bush's position on family values as a reason to support him, compared to 22% of white college women. This divide emerged on more narrow "values" questions. For instance, white non-college women (24%) were more likely than white college women (16%) to have doubts about Gore's position on legalizing gay unions. This election year, despite the candidates' reluctance to engage the abortion issue, choice divided women voters. For example, in the IAF survey, 40% of white college-educated women cited Gore's support for "a woman's right to choose" as their top reason for supporting his candidacy, while only 28% of white non-college women took this position. Twenty-five percent of non-college white women cited Bush's efforts to reduce abortions as reasons for supporting his candidacy compared to 20% of white college educated women. Values Matter Every election has its own "gender story" that the media tells about the role of women voters in the presidential race. Nearly all of these stories focus on women as Democratic voters based on their views about abortion rights and other "women's issues." But it is clear that important political divisions exist among women that are driven by long-term partisan loyalties and short-term political events. Women, like men, vote based on their affiliation with groups such as unions or their identities as African Americans or feminists. Like men, women voters are influenced by short-term political events such as the heightened attention to character and values generated by the impeachment scandal. These differences make it difficult to claim there is a "woman's vote" that either party can claim with any authority. Recognizing these differences should force the parties to think about how to build a majority coalition that includes a reliable base and attracts swing voters. It would behoove both parties to consider the way the family values debate divides women voters. Democrats need to consider that feminism and abortion draw certain women- not all women- to the party. Republicans need to consider that a set of sexual scandals heightened attention to values in ways unique to this election. Neither party can afford to take women voters for granted. * Published in the Women's Policy Journal of Harvard, Summer 2001, Vol. 1 Sources: Data:
References:
|
 |
||
 |
||
|
