This CAWP report takes stock of the experiences, perspectives, approaches, and influence of women in the U. The interviews provide considerable evidence of women's achievements despite the overall environment of gridlock and party polarization in which the women in Congress operate.
We looked at gender and party differences in candidate numbers and success in election to better understand why women made so little progress in representation. Our data demonstrates, consistent with research to date, that there appears to be no consistent gender disparity in candidate win rates; the real gender disparities exist in the proportions of women and men running at each phase of the electoral process.
These conclusions are consistent across party, though the dearth of women candidates is particularly acute in the Republican party. In , 78D, 26R women hold seats in the U. Congress, comprising Senate and 83 62D, 21R women House of Representatives. What will the U.
House of Representatives look like in ? Moreover, the most positive outcomes in are likely to come for Democratic women candidates, who are best situated to take new seats, while Republican women are likely to see a net loss in their ranks. Facts Research Programs. Women in State Legislative Elections Woman v.
Leave a Legacy Sponsor Supporters. Instead of programs like Bonanza , Here's Lucy, and the Doris Day Show , viewers in these huge metropolitan areas would be fed a steady diet of minute appeals by 50 or more House candidates spread across upwards of 20 districts. During my half-century on the campaign reform beat, there have been moments of elation with the passage of the post-Watergate legislation and the McCain-Feingold bill outlawing unregulated "soft money" in But such bursts of exuberance have mostly proven to be short-lived illusions.
They were undermined by dispiriting Supreme Court decisions Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United , an often non-functioning Federal Election Commission, and the embrace of free-spending mechanisms like Super PACs by politicians in both parties.
I will be honest: There have been moments when the shimmering goal of creating political campaigns that are not dominated by the super-wealthy has seemed as elusive as making Esperanto the world's second language. Still, if I squint when looking back, I can detect a few hopeful lessons for the next bipartisan drive for campaign reform. The word "bipartisan" was deliberately chosen to emphasize that any lasting campaign -finance legislation will need GOP support to survive a Senate filibuster and to earn across-the-board public approval in these politically polarized times.
Disclosure remains the bright spot in campaign reform since the days when Richard Nixon's bagmen delivered suitcases filled with cash to the Watergate plotters. The primary reason why respected members of Congress filed laughable campaign-finance reports in was that no one had been prosecuted under that section of the Corrupt Practices Act in more than 40 years.
For all the current frustration with the loopholes that mask the funding sources of "dark money" political groups, we live in a world where all federal candidates in both parties accept without question the legal requirement for full disclosure of donors. That alone represents major progress.
argo-karaganda.kz/scripts/pezesevel/4313.php Indeed, as the issue moves from election season to the next session of Congress, the big question is what the agenda and balance of power will be between the pro-climate-action and anti-EPA forces. For instance, in Louisiana, Democratic senator Mary Landrieu campaigns on her chairmanship of the Energy and Natural Resources committee and how that can help the state increase oil and gas drilling.
Climate policy will not endear her to voters in a state with a strong oil and gas sector.
For Begich, he doubts it will be a major factor in his bid for reelection. On the other hand, Republican candidate Carl DeMaio in San Diego has acknowledged that climate change is happening—perhaps because most residents of the city believe that climate change is happening, and there are fewer climate skeptics in the area. Kansas independent candidate Greg Orman and South Dakota independent Larry Pressler have acknowledged man-made climate change, with Orman voicing support for local wind power development versus an incumbent who favors the Keystone XL pipeline.
William J. So what does this mean for life after the midterm elections?
While much of the attention remains on Obamacare, climate change is one area where Democratic candidates may benefit from the shifting public opinion. Fewer and fewer Americans doubt that humans are contributing to climate change. Against this backdrop, Republican candidates still tend to avoid the topic, or to question the extent of climate change from human behavior.
Their ire still seems focused on the EPA rules—and whether Republican control of both houses of Congress can do anything to stop the rules from going into effect.
Given that, it is certain that no new climate change legislation will happen anytime soon. Republican control of the Senate, in particular, would likely lead to more intrusive and time consuming hearings on the EPA, its funding, and the nature of climate regulations. There could be increased efforts to defund the EPA.
House and Senate Republicans could make another attempt to strip the EPA of its authority to regulate greenhouse gases.