R. Gaull Silberman Center for Collegiate Studies
First Place Winner, 2007-2008 IWF College Essay Contest
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.
Attached Files
- 2007-2008 IWF College Essay Contest First Place Winner, PDF, 142.4 KB





12 Comments
Sandra Estes | November 25, 2008, 11:31am | #
Nicely stated.
Kimberly Koerber | November 25, 2008, 6:14pm | #
For an award winning article/essay, the article itself covers old issues with no real solutions, is not written in a style to catch anyones attention, and is plain boring. Sorry.
Emma Goldman | November 27, 2008, 3:21pm | #
No wonder McCain air-quoted "women's health" in the last debate! While he and the author of this boring and wordy article try to put down the real issues affecting millions of women in this country the rest of us will continue to fight against ignorance and the obscurantist ideas the article posits.
Deane Halvorsen | September 1, 2009, 10:51pm | #
Seriously, this was the winner?
Renee | October 14, 2009, 9:18pm | #
There is no theory in the essay to figure out what you are saying one minute you go about repubican and democrats. Then you refer to people about who is getting elected. This was not the ?
Betsy | October 20, 2009, 4:51pm | #
Yup:
"...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." Then, they went on to pick a real woman, Sarah Palin! What a poster child for the author's hopes and dreams that quiter turns out to be, and what an outcome!
Yeah, you GOP gals got it sooo wrong, Women do want EQUAL PAY, and a living wage would be nice too; I don't care who marries who and I don't want any government coming between me and my health care, so stay out of my womb already.
I must say you ladies do know a thing or two about the breakdown of the family (just ask Mrs. Ensign, Mrs. Sanford, Mrs. Vitter, etc. etc. etc. ) Oh and in case you did not hear, 30 of your dear husbands and protectors voted NAY last week for protection from RAPE for government contractor employees (yes, Cassidy, it is the Grand Old Party for your guys, isn't it?!)So this does indeed look like the "winner"essay, or is that the WHINER.
And again I have to ask:
WHY DO the REPUBLICAN'Ts hate AMERICA?!
With sympathy,
A real patriotic, Democratic-Liberal-Progressive-American who loves what this country can be
Christine | October 30, 2009, 11:44pm | #
This essay was clear and called out both Democrats and Republicans. Democrats have long taken the female vote for granted and Republicans have long given up trying to appeal to women until recently. Liberal leaning feminists tend to be closed minded, condescending, and downright mean.Women attack each other out of jealousy, envy,fear, or for whatever petty reason and tear each other down before men even have to the "equal" chance to do so.Everyone has a right to their opinion, but anyone can see from the posts that the claws come out and then women hide behind the right to an opinion argument.Obviously, the judges thought this essay was worthy of winning. This essay simply stated what was needed from both sides in the form of leadership according to the author.Just because the essay did not state what you wanted to hear does not mean it did not have a point. Congrats on the essay win from a traditional Latina conservative who fears that women's rights will be the least of our concerns with the megalomaniac administration currently in power (far less intelligent than Bush and far more power hungry).We've got to be more concerned about holding onto our constitutional rights before anything else at this point.
God Bless America.
Mazz | November 3, 2009, 11:25pm | #
The eassy has some good points. It's an attention getter. I was forced to stop and considered just what my government thinks of the issues facing women. Government agencies are not set up to help single mothers. They function to keep them below poverty level. Any women who has ever recieved assistance knows exactly what I'm talking about. Congrats on your win. Those who were unhappy with the winner take the challenge this year and produce something better.
Deanna | November 16, 2009, 11:34pm | #
Hmm... enlightening. Now I know, for the next contest, that the essays are judged by conservatives.
Sandy Zepp | December 11, 2009, 8:12am | #
I think that the eassy has some good points too. Then I was forced to stop and read the article what the woman are facing with the government. Because I want a scholarship because I never a had a scholarhip before.
Heidi | December 12, 2009, 3:55pm | #
Who says there is a breakdown of the family? My family is just fine. And who says there is a breakdown of the public school system? I attended public school and have done very well. This essay is full of generalized blanket statements about women that are incorrect for the majority of women. And what does this mean: "it would be too much to ask a far-left candidate to promote heterosexual marriage"? Are you suggesting that far-left are gay? Because I'm fairly liberal, straight and support all marriage, as long as its based on love. I guess its at least an original idea, but not very well argued, (as there is no real information, just generalizations) and has now been proven very wrong.
Christy | December 16, 2009, 7:31am | #
The comments on this article were interesting and proved that this essay was what it was supposed to be: thought provoking, self-searching and a personal search for the right words to be able to do what the first amendment to the Bill of Rights says we can do -- be we women or be we men -- the right to the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Unfortunately, the comments on this page were designed to demean the writer's freedom of speech. And, if I read the Bill correctly, the amendment only prevents Congress from impinging or impeding the author's rights. So, if by scratching with inked claws at the winner of this contest, the commentators sought to change opinions of intelligent readers, you all need to be elected to Congress -- then you can play in the big leagues, preventing, impinging, impeding or whatever floats your boat.
I love an intelligent essay that expresses the thoughts of the writer. It says so much about who elects whom in the government.