Scott Olson/Getty
Spain now has more women than men in its cabinet, a standard the President-elect should emulate.
In her November 18th blog posting on The Daily Beast, Tina Brown asked, “Will Secretary of State be enough for Hillary’s army?”
No, certainly not is our resounding reply. We will not be appeased with the appointment of one stand-out woman in a high profile position. The New Agenda is calling for "the most women ever" in President-elect Obama’s cabinet. The only appropriate response for a man touting “change” and leading our nation in an unprecedented economic crisis is to exceed the standard set by Presidents Bush and Clinton.
The hammering endured by Senator Clinton and Governor Palin at the hands of the media and pundits has served as a wake up call.
According to a ranking released by the World Economic Forum, the United States lags far behind much of the world when it comes to women holding positions of power. For the first time in history, a European country has a government with more women in the cabinet than men. The new Spanish cabinet has nine women alongside eight men, including the country’s first woman defense minister. The index based its ranking on economic participation, educational attainment, political empowerment, health and survival of women in 130 nations.
Bear in mind that Spain is the country whose exaggerated respect for all things masculine brought the word "machismo" to the English language. The Independent newspaper reports that many Spaniards can still recall the days when no woman could open a bank account, apply for a passport or sign a contract without her husband's permission.
Women have also made tremendous strides in national legislatures all across Europe. Sweden tops the list with women comprising nearly 50 percent of all members of parliament. Countries like Slovakia, Estonia, and Latvia rank ahead of the U.S. Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the forum, told the BBC, "Greater representation of women in senior leadership positions within governments and financial institutions is vital not only to find solutions to the current economic turmoil but to stave off such crises in the future."
The hammering endured by Senator Hillary Clinton and Governor Sarah Palin at the hands of the media and political pundits has served as a wake up call. It is reminiscent of a famous scene in the WWII movie Tora, Tora, Tora about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The Japanese commander in charge expresses grave reservations about the impending bombing because he believes it will provoke a mighty foe.
Not since Anita Hill was humiliated by a panel of 15 all-white male U.S. Senators have Americans been so provoked by the imbalance in power in this country. In 1991 Hill’s televised testimony became a lighting rod for the nation’s attitudes about sexism and racism. The outrage over Anita Hill’s mistreatment created a tsunami effect for women in politics. One year after Clarence Thomas was confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court; women ran for office in record numbers and won.
At The New Agenda we know our country needs talented women in leadership positions and we need them now. Senator Clinton would be a tremendous asset to our nation if she serves as Secretary of State. Clinton has traveled widely, is respected by foreign leaders in all corners of the globe and has spoken out for women and children in countries where they have no voice. Her confirmation would be a solid step toward repairing our nation’s image on the world stage. But, Clinton is not the only woman ready and able to serve. There are loads of women with the intelligence, talents and energy to help solve the tremendous challenges we face as a nation.
The Obama team needs to step up its efforts if it is to meet our challenge to smash century’s old precedent by appointing a woman majority cabinet. There appears to be just one other woman under serious consideration. Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano is being touted as a frontrunner for the head of Homeland Security. Many will remember Napolitano’s role preparing Anita Hill for that notorious hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Those hearings exposed the committee’s including its chair Senator Joe Biden embarrassing ignorance of sexual harassment issues.
This and other commissions and omissions leave us pondering where are the other women on the Obama team’s list? Candidate Obama promised the end of politics of division. So why is it that the only Republicans mentioned are white men? What about drawing upon the experience of a moderate like the former head of EPA and New Jersey Governor Christie Todd Whitman? Why not tap into the dynamism of Republican businesswomen Meg Whitman the founder of eBay or Carly Fiorina, formerly of Hewlett- Packard?
What about the elected officials who abandoned one of their own to support Obama in the primaries? U.S. Senators Claire McCaskill and Amy Klobuchar and Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius all have reformer track records.
General Ann Dunwoody the first woman 4-star general would be an inspired choice to head Veterans Affairs. Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm would be an excellent choice for Commerce, Labor, or HUD. The Lt. Governor of Wisconsin Barbara Lawton should be considered for Energy and Education. She would also be an excellent person to head the possible President's Commission of Women.
The history making need not end on election day. The Obama team could lift the spirits of millions of women and men by elevating women of distinction in more than 50% of his cabinet positions. President-elect Obama has an opportunity to demonstrate early his commitment to change and to leadership smart and strong enough to regain our global and economic eminence. That’s change we can all believe in.
Amy Siskind is co-founder of The New Agenda, a non partisan organization devoted to advancing women’s rights.
Tracy Quan's latest novel is Diary of a Jetsetting Call Girl, set in Provence and praised in The Nation as a "deft account of occupational rigors and anxieties before the crash." Tracy's debut, Diary of a Manhattan Call Girl, and the sequel, Diary of a Married Call Girl, are international bestsellers. A regular columnist for The Guardian, she has written for many publications including Cosmopolitan, The Financial Times, and The New York Times.
Joe Mathews is a journalist, an Irvine senior fellow at the New America Foundation, and a contributing writer at the Los Angeles Times. He previously served as Justice Department reporter for the Wall Street Journal and as a city desk reporter at the Baltimore Sun. He is the author of The People’s Machine: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of Blockbuster Democracy.
Gerald Posner is the award-winning author of 10 investigative nonfiction bestsellers, ranging from political assassinations, to Nazi war criminals, to 9/11, to terrorism (www.posner.com). Posner lives in Miami Beach with his wife, the author Trisha Posner.
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
Renata Espinosa is the New York editor of Fashion Wire Daily. She is also the co-founder of impressionistic fashion and art blog TheNuNu and a sometimes backup dancer for "The Anna Copa Cabanna Show."
Amanda Fortini has written for The New Yorker, Slate, Elle, and New York, among other publications. She lives in Los Angeles.
Amy Siskind is president and co-founder of The New Agenda, a nonpartisan organization devoted to advancing women’s rights.
Amy Siskind is president and co-founder of The New Agenda, a nonpartisan organization devoted to advancing women’s rights.
Amy Siskind is president and co-founder of The New Agenda, a nonpartisan organization devoted to advancing women’s rights.
by Amy Siskind
Amy Siskind is president and co-founder of The New Agenda, a nonpartisan organization devoted to advancing women’s rights.
I think by electing Hillary to SOS, that is a good start....not too sure if he made the right choice with her, especially with Bill as extra baggage!!!
I do think however that she will do an excellent job and put her heart and soul into it as she did for Obama on the campaign trail....where she did excel.
I'm sure other women will follow, Obama intends to have a diverse team to work with and one that can get this country back on track....I do have faith that we will have a great team when we forge ahead in the New Year.
Will it be perfect, trouble free, I doubt it and Obama has made that clear we have a lot to do and it will take time.....so for us patience will have to be a virtue for a while.
I feel it will be well worth it down the road, let's face it no way could it be any worse than what we've had to endure these past 8 years!!!
"Should Appointment"? I'd consider reading this if the headline had been edited. This doesn't bode well for the actual article.
The dynamism of Republican businesswomen Meg Whitman the founder of eBay or Carly Fiorina, formerly of Hewlett-Packard? Excuse me, but Whitman, when she briefly headed FTD, turned a successful co-op of florists into an unsuccessful for-profit company, destroying thousands of jobs (I did work for FTD at the time, when it still had HQ in Detroit). Fiorina made a monkey's breakfast of her division of HP, destroying some 25,000 jobs. Both managed to parachute to safety with bags of money, just like the boys. What other Republican women would we like? Michele Bachmann? And to say that Sarah Palin is stupid and claim that that is sexism expands the reach of the word "sexism" so that the word has lost all meaning. I hope the president elect chooses people who are smart and tough and whether they're men or women is of absolutely no relevance. Granholm, as you note, would be a good choice.
It would be great if Napolitano and HRC weren't the only female members of the cabinet, but I don't want to see token female republicans any more than I want to see token white male republicans. A more female cabinet would be great, as long as Sarah Palin is not included.
how about everyone stop worrying about gender and race and start worrying about who is more qualified to be appointed to an office?
I'm sorry, this is a weak article. I was hoping it wouldn't be, despite my reservations about the headline.
The essence of this article is that Obama should appoint a bunch of women because . . . well, just because! Yay for specious arguments!
ay on TV and we don't have to pretend it's news (hint, hint?
Interesting piece. Speaking of Anita Hill -- Gov. Janet Napolitano, a member of Obama's transition team and likely pick for Homeland Security head, was one of the lawyers who defended Hill. She is marvelous, and I hope she plays a major role in the new govt.
Oh dear sweet Jesus, when will all you 60s refugees and your identity politics drop dead so we can behave like rational human beings? Stop identifying yourself by your victimhood. There should be as many women in the Cabinet as Obama (and the Senate) feel are qualified. Whether that's two or six or ten is entirely up to them. Same with African-Americans, and Hispanics, and homosexuals.
We divide ourselves up into these stupid little groups and then demand a quota. Frankly, the skin color, genitals, and preferred means of achieving orgasm of cabinet secretaries is really immaterial.
I stopped reading when you began implying that sex should drive Obama's decision making process.
President Elect Obama will pick his interpretation of "the best people" for the jobs. Whether they urinate from an upright position will not be a factor.
So, you would prefer "heckuva job Bernice" to "heckuva job Brownie"? The "best" people should be appointed irrespective of gender. The times are too difficult to suggest otherwise for symbolism's sake.
I concede that there are too many women capable of doing a great job as cabinet members. But I don't get the point behind the article? do you mean that a woman with less qualifications should take the job of a man?
if so, why women feel angry when their gender becomes a handicap in this society. I wouldn't feel angry if his cabinet is constituted from much more women than men, and I think you shouldn't feel angry if the opposite happens.
Regarding Hilary, she is an awful pick as someone who supported the war and thinks that talking with iran would be a naive decision. I think that diplomacy is the least thing you can do before bombing somebody.
"Oh dear sweet Jesus, when will all you 60s refugees and your identity politics drop dead so we can behave like rational human beings? Stop identifying yourself by your victimhood."
Thanks for these riveting insights and sparkling logic. 'Drop dead' should we?
Remarkable how many NoBama supporters praise racial progress and equity to the high heavens, overlooking some stumbling blocks with a sniff factor of 10, only to take a hard line on gender balance.
Cool to bend over backwards on race and an outrage to even consider gender? LOL.
Delighted that HRC will soon supplant The One on the world stage as the most prominent and visible American. Hillary, you rock. Joe who??
I don't get the "calling Gov. Palin stupid is sexism." There are a few politicians that I would not call (exactly bright) and they are male. They may be "smart" but there is a strong perception in the way they convey their knowledge. I don't think the Gov. Palin is the best that the Republican party (GOP) has to offer. I think they should put forth the best of the best. These individuals have a great deal of responsibility ultimately and I don't think it should be taken lightly. There was definitely sexism during this election. However, I agree with closethistorian. "The best people should be appointed." There will definitely be women that will enter their hat in the playing field.
Once again, the huge, smelly elephant in the room of misogyny and sexism is ignored. The same, tiresome arguments that trap women in second- or third-class status, are trotted out and repeated as if they ever had merit. America should be ashamed of itself for lagging so far behind other parts of the world in equality issues. There is a qualified female for every position in Washington, and the time for raising our national collective consciousness is now.
The USA lags behind many other countries ( Rwanda is number 1 in the world for gender parity) and we have seen the results.
Why after 4 decades since the great women's liberation movement do we lack adequate health care for all? Why is violence against women and children not seen as front burner issues?
Well, when women are not a table bringing our ideas into domestic and foreign policy women and children suffer.
This is reality.
In Rwanda men in parliament were interviewed about the new female majority in the parliament. They said that women bring different things to the table. They continued to talk about how Rwanda women in parliament made rape a crime.
The men admitted that they would never have touched the issue.
So let's expand our minds and think: "What is not on the table in America because women are not seated at the table?
After 76 presidencies we have never had a woman in the White House - and we are 52% of the population.
No, you're not paranoid, we have a problem.
And, for soufiane,
If HRC was a terrible pick because she voted for IWR then I am sure you stomped your feet over Joe Biden as VO. He voted for IWR.
And, did you vote for the Green Party candidate in 2004? You must have because John Kerry voted for IWR.
The trashing of the first female to get this close to the presidency by members of her own party was astounding.
And the people who trashed her for IWR and then stood silent as Biden was picked proved the obvious.
Sexism is alive and well in the liberal left of the democratic party.
There are plenty of qualified women for cabinet positions. We, as over 50% of the population, should settle for nothing less that gender parity in the cabinet.
Yes, by all means point to Europe as what we should emulate.
Europe as we know it is dying out. Most countries are not producing enough children to maintain their populations, turning into countries of the aged. Looks like these admirable female parliamentarians and cabinet members forgot to have children.
Yesterday, I left the following post on The New Agenda site:
Amy,
Wouldn't it be fairer to wait until all the cabinet positions are filled before declaring the percentage is less than Clinton or Bush?
A question that strikes me about this blog is:
Is The New Agenda truly about advancing women's issues, or about nursing a seemingly infinite well of resentment against President-Elect Obama for having the audacity to defeat Hillary Clinton in the primary season?
Now that the "Candidate of your lifetime" has joined the team for the good of the country, it would be great if we, as Americans who are members of historically excluded groups, display a keen interest in how Obama's actions will lead the country forward, even while keeping one eye on the group's particular participation interests.
The point of this election was that ISSUES do still matter. Even though Obama's close alignment on major issues with Hillary seems to have no impact of the feelings toward him at The New Agenda.
But this Blog seems to have abandoned all substantive issues so that you can pursue "The Narrow Agenda" of gender, to the total exclusion of issues that "Divide women." Well, issues are what divide EVERYONE, black, white, male, female, young, old. The only way to avoid dividing any group is to essentially be about NOTHING substantial, except chromosomally-defined group identity.
Issues are why I, as an African-American, was thrilled to see Obama elected, but would NEVER have voted for Alan Keyes, Clarence Thomas, Larry Elder, or any number of blacks who I disagree with on the issues.
Most blacks, and the vast majority of women for that matter, are not so tunnel-vision determined to see a member of their group in power that they don't care what the candidate thinks. Not at all. Which is part of the reason Sarah Palin had such low support among women, and much higher support among men.
When I read this blog, I see support for Hillary Clinton often being transferred to Sarah Palin. That's two people who have ONLY gender in common. I wonder if you'd be just as happy to see Phyllis Schlafly, Michelle Malkin, and Barbara Boxer appointed to the cabinet. They'd all apparently be lauded here, because they'd go into the right hand column on your 52%-of-the government-or-bust-chart.
I respectfully submit that you have allowed the understandable pain and disappointment of Hillary's loss to narrow and warp your focus in a counterproductive way. That's my opinion. I'm sure it will probably unleash a flood of ire and name calling.
I support the ERA. I support Equal Pay For Women. I support Reproductive Freedom for women. I support women's rights.
But I don't support the approach your organization is currently taking. Your blogs drip with Obama bashing, and quota-centric demands, with little regard for anything else.
You are intelligent, passionate, and dedicated. You can do better.
DL Scott
____________________________
Here was Amy Siskinds response:
DL,
After all the cabinet positions are named, then it will be too late to speak out - that is the point.
Perhaps this is not the organization for you? No organization can possibly hope to make every American citizen happy. Perhaps for the type of thing you are looking for you should consider NOW, The White House Project or Emily's List - these organizations seem much more content to accept the status quo and take what they can get from President-elect Obama. That is NOT what The New Agenda is about.
It was nice having you at our site. When you return from your break, I think we would prefer that you take your energies elsewhere.
_____________
I think that probably says more than I ever could about Ms. Siskind and The New Agenda. This happened after I posted on her site the first time.
Close-minded rage seems to be her reaction to anyone who doesn't agree with her. Dialogue is impossible. Disagreement on any point makes you an enemy. No doubt her's will remain a tiny fringe movement because she behaves in a hysterical fringe way while trying to give the appearance of calm reasonableness.
She proceeded to erase my answer to her and block me from ever posting in the "Atta gir!" ooops, I mean "Comments" section of her blog. Yikes.
DL Scott
I hear you, Amy, on the gender issue here. It is interesting how there is much support for other affirmative action measures (see Obama, Barack for President) when they affect men of color or men of other religions, et. al, but when you try to address the gender issue, suddenly everyone sounds like an affirmative action-banning activist. Let's have all or nothing, folks. We either drop the "identity politics" altogether, and that goes for everyone, or we man up and start recognizing women as an enormous and talented group of people that deserve special consideration for these posts, in order to reverse thousands of years of inequality and modern day, boys club variety misogyny. Let's pick one or the other, consideration of all "identities" or none. But you can't have a little of this and a little of that and expect everyone to go along with it.
Test.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.