IBJOpinion

Why women matter

October 22, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Letters To The Editor

The Mayor’s Office in Indianapolis is not in step with women. Out of 17 top positions, the administration has only one appointment that is a woman. In addition, this is the first time since Richard Lugar was mayor there is not a woman as deputy mayor.

Women make up the majority of the American voting population, and utilizing them in the political system brings different attitudes, priorities and perspectives. It is clear that when women are at the policymaking table, the conversation changes, says Karen O’Conner, director of the Women and Politics Institute at American University in Washington, D.C. O’Conner asserts that the presence of women in legislative bodies makes a significant difference not only in what gets discussed, but also in what kinds of legislation are advanced. Three decades of research proves that:

• Women conceptualize problems differently and are more likely to offer new solutions;

• Women legislators of both parties are more likely to advance “women’s issues,” define women’s issues more broadly than men, put them at the top of their legislative agendas, and to take a leadership role in those issue areas. This results in bills dealing with children, education and health care becoming legislative priorities;

• Women are more likely to view crime as a societal, rather than individual, problem;

• Women legislators are more likely to make certain that their policy positions are translated into new programs to help women;

• Women legislators receive more constituent casework requests than their male colleagues and are three times more likely to agree that they would do more if they had more staff;

• Women not only are more responsive to constituent requests, they are more likely to be persistent in their follow through to get a favorable resolution for their constituents;

Women across America are creating small businesses that not only provide goods and services, but put people back to work. In addition, research has shown that when women are present in leadership positions, the bottom line improves—from financial profits to the quality and scope of decision making.

In order to change this equation, women must vote in the upcoming election. Criticizing one another as we’ve seen in recent advertising impedes our efforts to position women in key roles within our government.

____________

Billie Dragoo
RepuCare Inc.

Deborah Collins Stephens
author, speaker, consultant

Denise Herd
Herd Strategies LLC

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I'm a CPA who works with a wide range of companies (through my firm K.B.Parrish & Co.); however, we work with quite a few car dealerships, so I'm fairly interested in Fatwin (mentioned in the article). Does anyone have much information on that, or a link to such information? Thanks.

  2. Historically high long-term unemployment, unprecedented labor market slack and the loss of human capital should not be accepted as "the economy at work [and] what is supposed to happen" and is certainly not raising wages in Indiana. See Chicago Fed Reserve: goo.gl/IJ4JhQ Also, here's our research on Work Sharing and our support testimony at yesterday's hearing: goo.gl/NhC9W4

  3. I am always curious why teachers don't believe in accountability. It's the only profession in the world that things they are better than everyone else. It's really a shame.

  4. It's not often in Indiana that people from both major political parties and from both labor and business groups come together to endorse a proposal. I really think this is going to help create a more flexible labor force, which is what businesses claim to need, while also reducing outright layoffs, and mitigating the impact of salary/wage reductions, both of which have been highlighted as important issues affecting Hoosier workers. Like many other public policies, I'm sure that this one will, over time, be tweaked and changed as needed to meet Indiana's needs. But when you have such broad agreement, why not give this a try?

  5. I could not agree more with Ben's statement. Every time I look at my unemployment insurance rate, "irritated" hardly describes my sentiment. We are talking about a surplus of funds, and possibly refunding that, why, so we can say we did it and get a notch in our political belt? This is real money, to real companies, large and small. The impact is felt across the board; in the spending of the company, the hiring (or lack thereof due to higher insurance costs), as well as in the personal spending of the owners of a smaller company.

ADVERTISEMENT