By Cassidy Bugos
Whether a Democrat or a Republican, the president-elect who takes the oath next January will not have won by the male vote alone, but will have judiciously curried the favor of female constituents nationwide.
Any 2008 Presidential-hopeful who peddles him or herself to women by endlessly touting "reproductive rights," exploiting his supposed boyish charms, or appealing to their mutual sex insults the intelligence of female voters. To lock up the female vote, candidates must prove that they will defend true American values-the same values that have done so much to liberate women in America and around the globe.
The fact is, American women have more to think about these days than how wonderful it is to be female. Consequently, those who vote for Hillary Clinton will not be voting for her simply to celebrate her womanhood, but because they agree with her policies. Those who vote against her will do so because she swings afield of the values of the majority of Americans.
Today more American women want a government that is practical, efficient, and self-limiting, because more American women ascribe to a feminism that is practical, efficient, and self-limiting. A candidate who defends the basic principles of limited government, free markets, affordable health care, choice in education, and a strong, effective foreign policy and national defense is a candidate who defends the interests of American women.
Indeed, these issues especially resonate with female voters since so many women seek their happiness in motherhood while at the same time striving to succeed in challenging and fulfilling careers. Hence women have historically shown a slight preference for big-government Democratic platforms that pledge more services. But this gender gap has narrowed in recent elections, a reflection of the fact that American women are more educated and more financially independent than ever before.
In 2008, all issues will be women's issues.
The candidate who knows what concerns cut across age, income, and education is a candidate who operates on the principle that no welfare program can replace the family. No doubt it would be too much to ask a far-left candidate to promote heterosexual marriage, but as president he or she would be faced with the responsibility of arresting the social and economic decline that started with the breakdown of the family. A candidate who advocates reforming no-fault divorce and making divorce harder to obtain, as well as the removal of the marriage penalties in the tax code, is a candidate who as president would go a long way toward arresting decline. Likewise, reforming the public school system so that parents are free to choose their child's school would be a giant step toward defeating the deterioration of American education.
Women voters know that concrete measures like these, designed to protect the family, would also give long-term stability to the economy. They will be skeptical, however, of candidates who offer straw-man quick-fixes to the problems faced by women, particularly poor women and single mothers. For instance, many Democrat contenders want to increase the minimum wage and mandate more employee benefits, but some women are wary, realizing that an employer who is forced to pay workers more may also be forced to make cost-cutting decisions such as lay-offs and salary reductions. The candidate who understands what women want will promise instead to make tax cuts, increase job opportunities by removing undue regulations, and devise Social Security and pension systems that increase women's opportunities to save and invest their money as they see fit.
Stay-at-home mothers, working mothers, and single women all share in the American spirit of free enterprise and self-reliance. Women represent the greater proportion of purchasing decisions made in the United States, thus benefiting directly from global free trade. However, unlimited expansion does not benefit women if it comes at the expense of stable family life and a healthy moral culture. Increasing political and economic individual freedom is the American way of preserving this balance.
Democrats have a tradition of pandering to women as a bloc, but it is a safe bet that in 2008 they will only be using their usual stale catch-phrases of "reproductive rights" and "equal pay," shaking their fists at imaginary foes while neglecting to address the issues with which American women are most concerned. The ball is in the court of the GOP contender who can show himself tuned in to the real needs and concerns of the female population, and who has realistic solutions to the unique problems faced by women pursuing the American dream.