National Women's Political Caucus of WA Blog

The National Women's Political Caucus of Washington State is a grassroots, multi-partisan, volunteer-run, membership organization dedicated to increasing women's participation in the political process and getting more feminist women elected and appointed in Washington State. The NWPC is a national organization that was founded in 1971 and has chapters in 20+ states.

[nwpcwa-blog]

Time for women to lean in for parity in public office

By LINDA MITCHELL AND MELISSA THOMPSON ALEXANDER — appeared in the Tacoma News Tribune on October 29, 2013

Washington has long been a leader in women’s equity. Women were given the right to vote here in 1910 – 10 years before the 19th Amendment’s ratification. In 1926, Seattle Mayor Bertha Knight Landes became the first woman to lead a major American city. Dixy Lee Ray became one of the nation’s first female governors.

More recently, in 2004, Washington became the first state to elect all women – Gov. Christine Gregoire and Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell – to the state’s top three offices.

None of this happened by accident.

For 40 years, the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) of Washington has worked to get more women involved in the political process by recruiting, training and electing women to office. After four decades of advocacy, there’s still work to do.

In the early 1990s Washington let the nation with more than 40 percent of seats in our state Legislature held by women. Today, that number is 30 percent.

One of the biggest challenges to gender parity in office is that women don’t run. According to a national study by the Center for American Women in Politics, women are much more likely to run if they’re recruited by others. Men don’t wait to be asked.

The NWPC of Washington recently conducted a survey of women to identify the barriers to entry for public office. Women need to know they have a strong community of support behind them. In our survey, women said having a strong network of allies ready to help was the most important part of their decision to run.

And this is where we can make a difference – women helping other women. We need to be able to unite behind women candidates and create a level playing field for elections. According to research from the Barbara Lee Foundation, voters – including women voters – have a higher standard for what they’ll consider a “qualified” woman candidate.

We need to be aware of how we as women can inadvertently undercut one another by buying into arguments that men are more qualified, better fundraisers or better negotiators. We can help one another play up our strengths.

As women, we need to commit to supporting women candidates with our financial donations, with our growing influence and networks and, most importantly, with our vote.

This November, the NWPC has endorsed more than 60 women candidates in local elections. Women in Washington are leaning in and running for office. Now it’s our turn to lean in and elect them.

Linda Mitchell is the current president of the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC) of Washington. Melissa Thompson Alexander is a past president and co-founder of the organization.

[nwpcwa-blog]

What’s the dirty little secret women are confronted with each day?

Guest blogger Betsy Goldberg

When people are in situations where they aren’t confident, they reveal it through a series of giveaways. If your reaction when challenged publicly is to laugh, you’ve just displayed a lack of confidence.   “Your voice more than your physical appearance outs you,” Allen said.   A shaky voice, mumbling, vanishing volume, a high pitch and a sentence ending that goes up four octaves” are all signs of insecurity. To project confidence in your voice, think lower, louder, and slower.     The physical signs of insecurity are also giveaways: shifting from leg to leg, playing with hair, blushing. To appear purposeful, plant your feet while standing. It’s okay to move around, but always plant your feet solidly again once you’re done with walking. Stand straight. “No hands in pockets and no slouching,” cautioned Allen.   Allen also offered tips for those who blush easily: drinj ice-cold water with a squirt of lemon, breathe deeply, and lower the temperature of your neck.   To build overall confidence, Allen recommended focusing on the following actions:   Dress Sharp When you don’t look good, it changes the way you interact with people.  Allen recommended that the women in attendance dress one class above your audience (khakis, not jeans, at the Labor picnic). Make sure your clothes fit you and are not distracting. Allen’s two ironclad sartorial rules for women? “No cleavage is ever good for a woman running for office,” she said, advising women to cover up.  And “no short skirts.” However, it is fine to leave the panty hose at home, thanks to First Lady Michelle Obama popularizing the bare-legged look.      Allen advises the female candidates she works with to consider suits in a cherry red or a blue – turquoise, royal or cobalt. Those are, of course, in addition to the mainstays of a female politician’s wardrobe of suits in black, navy, grey and brown.   Keep extra clothes around and change them and shoes to feel more confident. “Just changing a shoe gives you more energy,” noted Allen.  Ideally, she recommends starting the day in the highest heels you wear, then decreasing heel height with changes later in the day, though she acknowledged that wasn't always realistic!   Building a professional wardrobe doesn’t have to be expensive; Allen told the group that Seattle has 47 consignment stores. Women should play around with colors to find out which look best on them, and Allen recommends they try vibrant colors such as fuchsia, green and purple.   Walk Faster Your walk tells the world how you feel about yourself. People with confidence walk quickly, noted Allen. Walking 25 percent faster will make you look and feel more important and energetic. “Pick it up, ladies, pick it up,” she recommended.   Stand (and Sit) Tall Good posture will make you feel more confident, alert and empowered.  Stand up straight, keep your head up, make eye contact and don’t fidget or flail, advises Allen. Beware of slumped shoulders and lethargic movements. “Chest out, butt in,” Allen recommended.  Most women have more trouble with posture when they’re sitting, not standing. Sit at the edge of the chair and keep your back straight.   Sit in the Front Row People sit in the back of a room because they’re afraid of being noticed.  This reflects a lack of self-confidence. Instead, sit in the front. It will help you get over your fears and make an impression.   Speak Up Women are often reluctant to speak up (or speak first) in a discussion, fearful that people will judge them for saying something stupid. Actually, most people are dealing with that same fear. By speaking up at least once in every group discussion, you’ll become a better public speaker, more confident in your own thoughts, and recognized as a leader. Allen counseled, “Be visible, not invisible.”   Be Grateful When you focus too much on what you want, you’ll find reasons why you can’t have it. Then you wind up dwelling on your weaknesses. Instead, be grateful. Make time every day to mentally list everything you’re grateful for. Recall your past successes, unique skills, loving relationships and positive momentum. You’ll be amazed at how much you have going for you and you’ll feel more confident and motivated.   Compliment Others When you think negatively about yourself, you transfer that negativity to your feelings about others. Break the cycle by complimenting others.  Praise them and thank them. Look for the good in other people, especially women. By looking for the best in others, you’ll bring out the best in you.   Give Back Giving back helps you focus on the needs of others, not yourself.  It helps you stop thinking about yourself and your flaws. Even better, you’ll be contributing more, which garners recognition, rewards you with personal success, and builds more self-confidence.   Accept Compliments Many women feel awkward when they’re complimented; they’ll rock back and forth, look up or down or away, shake their heads, or downplay their achievement. Allen recommended that women learn how to absorb a compliment instead. To do so, look at the audience and “shut up.” Look engaged and even smile a little. “Don’t give people a reason to think you’re not deserving of it,” Allen said.   Exercise: Boosting Your Self-Confidence Allen recommended an exercise that originated with Emily’s List for every woman looking to build her confidence: write a 30-second speech that highlights your specific strengths and accomplishments in all areas of your life. “What’s the strength and the power of what you are?” she queried. The women attending the session found pen and paper and took to the task, and a few volunteered to present their speeches out loud.   Allen advised the women to recite the speech in front of a mirror whenever they need a boost. Your speech will remind you of your achievements and eliminate thoughts of your insecurity. Or as Allen put it to the audience, “Don’t let the bad tapes drown out the good tapes.”

[nwpcwa-blog]

Interview with Sue Rahr, King County's First Female Sheriff

[nwpcwa-blog]

Women losing ground in Washington Legislature and statewide offices

Published as OpEd in the Seattle Times on 12/18/12

The 2012 election was a mixed bag of news for women candidates and women voters. While women scored major victories at the national level, we lost ground in Washington state.

This election was poised to be another Year of the Woman. Redistricting opened up several new competitive seats and high voter turnout created a favorable election environment for women to run and win.

In 1994, the first Year of the Woman, Washington led with a record number of women in statewide office. Almost 20 years later, Secretary of State Kim Wyman will be the sole statewide woman officeholder, not including the Supreme Court.

If any year demonstrated the importance of having a pipeline of up-and-coming women leaders ready to run for office, this was it.

Washington has an incredible pool of talented women leaders. This January, Washington will be one of only three states to send two women to the U.S. Senate. From the ranks of chief executive officers and executive directors to heads of neighborhood groups and PTAs, there is no shortage of skilled women actively working to improve our state’s business climate, education system and communities.

But few of them choose to run for office.

When asked why, women have many (good) reasons: their kids are too young or aging parents are sick; they are focusing on their career and building up their résumé; or they say they can’t stomach negative campaigning and worry about their family’s privacy.

But the No. 1 reason women don’t run for office is nobody asked them.

That’s the big difference between men and women who choose to run for office. Men rarely wait for someone to ask. Women typically must be asked, sometimes repeatedly, while they wait for the right time.

The shortage of women in public office means a shortage of diverse, influential voices in the rooms where public policies are decided. Both the agenda and the process are shaped by who has a seat at the table.

How can Washington re-establish its place as a national leader in electing women to public office? It starts with each of us asking a woman to run, and letting her know she won’t have to figure out how to do it on her own.

Organizations such as the National Women’s Political Caucus are dedicated to identifying and training women who are interested in running for office. Annual campaign training provides nuts-and-bolts information as well as networking opportunities with other elected women and political experts.

In January, women are invited to join the National Women’s Political Caucus at “Running for Office: What You Need to Know Now,” an opportunity for women to learn about the process and resources available to help them.

More information is available at www.wpcnet.org.

Will you ask a woman to run today?

Linda Mitchell is president of The National Women’s Political Caucus of Washington, a founding member of the Center for Women & Democracy, and past chair of the Seattle Women’s Commission.

[nwpcwa-blog]

Work Smart, Get Organized!

"We are multitasking our brains out."

Elizabeth Bowman, President of Innovatively Organized, began Tuesday's Smart Women Salon with this astute observation. She explained that, more and more, we are getting information and assignments from many sources. Replying to emails consumes the better part of our day, our digital devices keep overflowing with notifications, papers piled high on desks -- it is no wonder that upwards of 40% of American adults get less than seven hours of sleep a night.

"I am tired of seeing people burning out," Bowman remarks that this fact drove her to start Innovatively Organized, a Seattle-based productivity consulting firm that helps overextended executives and teams become more effective. At the Smart Women Salon, Bowman shared valuable tools and suggestions to integrate into daily habits. Often, small changes will result in big differences. An extra hour gained could be the difference between leaving work on time or getting home late.

As Bowman explained, first and foremost it is necessary to limit the number of places you receive information from. The less places you have to physically go look, the better. If you prefer email, consolidate as much as possible to your email inbox (organized, of course), rather than dividing time between email, texts, phone messages, Post-Its, and anything else. This will cut down on time spent switching between devices -- the less you need to manage, the more you will be able to accomplish.

Bowman also advocated for the "2 Minute Rule”. Tasks that will take two minutes or less to complete should be done right away. Although it can be applied to any number of things, email is where you will likely use it the most. People are often aware of what's arrived in their inbox, but neglect to take action. Many times, we quickly read through a short email and don’t reply for days or weeks. When we finally do respond (often when prompted by the person who sent it), explaining the delayed response may take twice as long as replying to the initial email would have taken. One email message may not appear to make a difference, but ten, twenty, or even as few as five certainly can. If you can do it now and do it quickly...do it and get it out of the way!

However, effective email management also requires organizing your inbox and she advocated for four "must-have" folders:

1. Needs Response, for emails that would take longer than two minutes;

2. Take Action, for tasks needing to be done;

3. Waiting for Response, for email conversations to which you have responded to, but are waiting for the other person's response. This can be seen as a "follow up folder." Following up to all those emails will not only make you appear really organized, but will also subtly condition those around you to respond to your messages promptly;

4. Read and Review, for messages and general information to read over carefully at a later time.

The principles of effective organization aren't too different for people preferring paper to electronic devices. A task list is critical; it should include the task, due date, the estimated time to complete, and location. Those last two are often overlooked but are key! Providing a time estimate makes it much more likely you will actually do the task (and makes it easier to delegate), and will also aid in time management and prevent overbooking. Similarly, adding a location where the task can be completed – like your office, home, or “anywhere” makes it easier to find something to work on where you find yourself.

Bowman also acknowledges that people who prefer paper can tend to let it pile up--many of us are guilty of this. She suggests asking specific questions to determine whether a piece of paper can stay or needs to go, including, "Do I have a specific reason to keep this paper?", "Will I set aside time to read this paper again?", and "Does this meet the current purpose of my space?" It may seem simple, but only deceivingly so; consciously evaluating your physical space will help eliminate unnecessary clutter, maximizing productivity.

Bowman also recommended several online and mobile productivity tools, including:

- TeuxDeux (www.teuxdeux.com), an online to-do list that crosses out completed tasks and moves unfinished items to the next day automatically

- Time Timer, available on mobile devices, a clock that visually displays a set chunk of time and shows the chunk decreasing as time passes (great to have on display during a meeting!)

- Cool Timer, available on mobile devices, a timer you can set to any length of time

- Toodledo (www.toodledo.com), an online and mobile to-do list that offers the ability to delegate and email tasks, and includes a timer for each task

- ScanSnap, desktop and portable scanners that can capture business card information, among other

- Evernote, which stores online notebooks

- OneNote, which stores electronic notebooks

- Carbonite, online data backup

A key take-away from this Smart Women Salon: be consistent! Paper or electronic, picking the right time management system and sticking to it will pay dividends in added time and less stress.

by Guest Blogger Juliya Ziskina

[nwpcwa-blog]

Communicate your personal brand through your wardrobe

"If you are your own brand, then your wardrobe is your logo."

Darcey Howard introduced this fundamental–and yet often overlooked–concept at the Smart Women Salon, put on by the National Women's Political Caucus of Washington. The Salon's theme urged attendees to "Be Intentional–Be Your Brand."

So, how does one be a brand, and what does that mean, anyway?

Professional speaker and entrepreneur Darcey Howard explains it as the image that you communicate to your audience. A brand is an intentional representation of who you are and what your goals are to create a greater sense of authenticity and confidence. It is more than simply managing a wardrobe; it speaks to originality and ownership of how you look in conjunction with who you are communicating your unique attributes to.

Howard explains that it's difficult to overstate the importance being conscious of the image you're projecting to others. People invariably respond to the visual cues they perceive–if your wardrobe looks tired and mundane, people will perceive that your skills and attitude are, too. She continues: "We ask people to invest in us every day, but first we must invest in ourselves." This involves time, self-confidence, and self-knowledge to make strategic decisions about what we wear.

Understandably, many women aren't exactly sure how to approach this process. Howard advises to start from the basics and then inject personality. Take inspiration from something you love, something that gives you meaning, and use that inspiration to make an outfit. She recounts an experience working with a woman who is a gardener, whom she asked, "How do you put together a container?" The gardener lit up, and immediately began explaining that she would use a "thriller piece," then fill remaining space with filler and some spillers. Howard replied to her, "Now let's go back to your closet and pretend you're creating a container." That came much easier to her!

An ideal, memorable–but not distracting–outfit should be a reflection of your best attributes and should communicate to your audience. A creative type, a graphic designer, for example, will not inspire confidence in clients if she shows up in a plain white blouse and standard black slacks. An accountant is expected to reflect a certain structure. That does not, however, have to mean boring. Certain colors and textures evoke corresponding emotions from both the wearer and the audience, and will drastically influence attitude in the visual exchange.

The "Personal Branding Through Appearance" approach is largely a visual concept, but the Six Parameters of Strategic Dressing that Howard outlined give it a straightforward, linear element. The Parameters include essentials to consider when shopping for clothes. These include, but are not limited to, color palette, time and longevity of the piece, and how the piece makes you feel. By meeting at least three of the six parameters, you can successfully streamline shopping for the perfect outfit that communicates your visual message, your brand, a help you avoid a closet mostly full of "standard" blacks and grays.  

In only an hour, Darcey Howard communicated important principles that are relevant to everyone, in virtually every profession. Everyone has an audience, and everyone is presented with opportunities for success every day, however they define it, and your morning wardrobe decisions could be the deciding factor!

Guest Blogger: Juliya Ziskina

[nwpcwa-blog]

2012 Is For Women

Women's political gains are happening in nearly every part of the world. Saudi women have been given the right to vote and stand as candidates themselves, something that would have been unimaginable ten years ago. Egyptian women worked successfully to get a guaranteed 25% minimum quota for women parliamentarians written into the new constitution. The constitutions of Iraq, Rwanda, Nepal, and Kenya have similar provisions, guaranteeing a minimum level of women in Parliament. Last year, numerous other countries made significant strides in affording women equal political representation – but not the United States. Currently, the US ranks 67th in terms of women's representation. In fact, nearly every region of the world has gained women national political leaders in the last 50 years - the United States has not.

However, 2012 promises to be an important year for women to make political gains. Internationally acclaimed trainer and former NWPC-WA Vice President Cathy Allen calls it the "40 Year Message," meaning that "women didn't have it as good in the last 20 years, and won't have it as good in the next 20." Why?

The election of 2012 presents a once-in-a-decade opportunity for women to increase their numbers in office. Following the 2010 census, every congressional and state legislative district in the country is being redrawn, and new and open seats are being created. Reapportionment creates opportunity, and research shows that women have more success winning open seats.

2012 is a presidential election year, bringing out more voters. Voter turnout in Washington state is likely to be the highest in the country, predicted to be as high as 86%, according to the Secretary of State. Many young voters are in that mix, estimates indicate that 68% of 18-34 year olds are expected to cast ballots and, historically, young voters tend to be more tolerant, progressive, and inclined to vote for women rather than men. In Washington, when there is a higher turnout of young voters, and when there is more than 80% turnout, women win.

This every-20-year combination of reapportionment and a presidential election (and a governor’s race here in Washington) creates an exciting opportunity for women to make real gains across the country unlike anything we’ve seen since the last “Year of the Woman” in 1992 when 24 new women were elected to the House and five to the Senate (including our own Sen. Patty Murray), the largest increase in history.

Why does it matter? If Democratic women hold or gain seats this fall they will have numbers necessary to stop recent union busting bills that impact women in jobs like nursing and teaching. For instance, 73% of the membership of the American Federation of Teachers is female. The debate over the debt ceiling and spending cuts have targeted many of the programs and resources women rely on for healthcare, retirement, feeding their children, and family planning.

In the last election cycle, conservative members of Congress ran on an agenda of creating jobs, but instead have pulled a "bait and switch" and seemed singularly focused on social issues - the most astounding being their war on health and reproductive access for women. Conservatives seem intent on creating intrusive, overreaching policies, from trying to redefine rape to defunding contraceptive services at Planned Parenthood. With the assault on reproductive rights both on the state and national level, electing and re-electing progressive women candidates is essential to pushing back against anti-women legislation.

Statewide, there are many open seats, including positions for Governor, Secretary of State, Auditor, and Attorney General, as well as two open congressional seats and several legislative seats. More qualified, competent, and respected women should be running. Why aren’t they?

The political world is brutal and getting worse, and women are not inclined to participate. They worry for their family and privacy and they think about making a difference in ways they consider more effective: behind the scenes. As Cathy Allen pointed out, “Men, from a very young age, are oriented towards leadership positions. Women, on the other hand, look up at some point in their careers and say: 'I think I've had enough experience in the world to do this.'”

Women haven’t been asked to run, and when asked, they have usually not thought about running before. Because of this, they often lack the networks and roadmap to be successful.

The 2012 Project is actively working to remedy this situation. The 2012 Project is a national, non-partisan campaign to increase the number of women in congress and state legislatures by taking advantage of the once-in-a-decade opportunities of 2012. To do this, the 2012 Project has assembled a faculty of former elected women legislators to share the facts about women's underrepresentation and the many benefits of public service. The project is actively targeting and recruiting women between the ages of 45-55 in six business sectors: health, science & technology, finance, energy & environment, international relations, and small business, speaking to industry organizations and nonprofits about running for office. Women interested in taking the next step toward candidacy are connected to leadership institutes, think tanks, campaign training programs and fundraising networks designed to help them succeed in their own states.

This is the year to make a difference in the political world, whether by campaigning yourself, or working on a campaign. The National Women's Political Caucus has partnered with the 2012 Project to help identify women candidates and to take full advantage of this important election cycle. The NWPC-WA is seeking to recruit successful, capable women and provide the training and networks that they need to run and win in 2012!

Posted by: Juliya Ziskina

[nwpcwa-blog]

Honoring the 2011 Campaign Heroines

Every year, many women across Washington state work hard to ensure that women win campaigns and are represented equally in political leadership roles. They make phone calls; they go door-to-door; they manage assets; they provide support and important encouragement. These women are the backbone of so many successful campaigns, but oftentimes remain behind the scenes – the unsung heroines. On Sunday, December 11th, they were honored at the Heroines of 2011 Award Ceremony, a reception hosted by the National Women's Political Caucus of Washington. The National Women's Political Caucus of Washington is a multi-partisan grassroots membership organization dedicated to engaging women in the political process and increasing the number of women in elected and appointed office at all levels of government. Its mission is to identify, mentor, educate and support women leaders in the community who demonstrate a commitment to women's economic and social equality and reproductive freedom.  In the weeks before the event, women nominated an outstanding "heroine" a woman who was indispensable to their campaign - to be publicly honored by the NWPC. The event featured about 20 strong and hard-working women, each leaders in their own right and each furthering the values of the NWPC in their own way. Despite being from a wide variety of backgrounds and experiences, the Campaign Heroines all shared an unwavering dedication not only to the campaigns they served on, but also to the women candidates themselves. While technical management and assistance was undoubtedly recognized, nearly every woman spoke of the emotional support and friendship their Campaign Heroines provided to them over the course of the campaign. For instance, in honoring the Honorable Val Ogden, Representative Sharon Wylie of the 49th legislative district in Clark County, commented that “Val’s support, friendship and faith in me inspire me to be the best public servant I can be”; and candidate Linda Barnfather thanked her heroine, whom she referred to as “the extraordinary Nancy Biery” and said “she's a leader, a friend, and I am happy that she chose me and my race.”  Many fought against formidable opponents - anti-choice incumbents, male conservatives with financial backing - and won. While their victories are enormous, the contributions of the Heroines who made it happen are equally significant.  When positions from school boards to representative seats are occupied by a disproportionate number of male politicians, it is imperative to step up and equalize the playing field. As freelance writer and Campaign Heroine Joan Cronk says, "After so many years, I am tired of my gender being poorly represented in my government."  “This is our favorite event of the year,” said event co-chair, Sharon Paige. “The stories that candidates tell when honoring their Heroines are so inspirational, we are pleased to be able to provide this well-deserved recognition to women who are making a difference!” Each campaign Heroine received a certificate with the words of their nominator, a wine glass commemorating the 100th anniversary of women’s right to vote in Washington, and a one-year membership in the NWPC. Posted by: Juliya Ziskina

[nwpcwa-blog]

Smart Women Salon: The Women of the Washington State Supreme Court

On Wednesday, June 1, 2011, NWPC-WA hosted a Smart Women Salon in collaboration with Washington Women Lawyers that featured a panel discussion with the women of the Washington State Supreme Court: Chief Justice Barbara Madsen, Justice Susan Owens, Justice Mary Fairhurst, and Justice Debra Stevens. The panel was moderated by King County Superior Court Judge Mary Yu and was the largest Salon yet, with nearly 60 women in attendance! The Justices answered questions ranging from how a woman’s presence on the Court changes how it functions, to what advice they had for younger women entering politics. Chief Justice Madsen commented that she didn’t think that ordinarily, women’s presence has an impact on the Court’s decisions; however, she said there have been cases when the women judges have held an opinion opposite the male judges.  An example was a case when a domestic violence issue was before the court and the male men didn’t view it as domestic violence, while the women did.  The women on the court found themselves explaining to the men that the incident - in this case, where a man pushed his spouse to the ground, was in fact domestic violence and needed to be treated as such. However, cases like that are not the norm on the court and the biggest influence women have on the court is in setting the agenda. Justice Fairhurst emphasized that the court needs to focus on diversity in gender, but also ethnicity, age, and other criteria. In 2003, the Court had a female majority. The Justices noted that women, being used to male majorities in professions such as law, think nothing of it, but when men saw the women sitting or conversing together, they immediately saw it as a conspiracy. The women learned that there are still struggles for women in the working world. Finally, the Justices gave their advice to the women in the room. Justice Owens said that when one runs for election, they need to be prepared to find out that someone they think supports them, doesn’t. She said, “Some people will vote for you because you’re the incumbent and some people will vote for you because they like you. Some people won’t vote for you because you’re the incumbent, and some people won’t vote for you because they don’t like you.”  The other Justices said that a candidate needs to know and be able to articulate why she wants the position she is running for, what she can bring to the job, and why she is passionate about it. In addition, young women specifically need to remember that they can balance a family and a career, and that it is possible, often necessary, to do both.  The biggest piece of advice they gave to women was to not forget where, as women, we have come from and the struggles we have faced. Be grateful, reach out, and believe you can make a difference. At the end of the event, Justice Fairhurst took a point of privilege to ask the women in the room to believe in miracles.  She was recently diagnosed with stage four terminal cancer and distributed purple wrist bands to the attendees with “Believe in Miracles” inscribed on them. Justice Fairhurst said that, in addition to hoping for a miracle for her cancer, she was also hoping for world peace. “Might as well dream big,” she said. Guest Blogger, NWPC Intern, Anita Yandle

[nwpcwa-blog]

Political Strategists Share Info About Women in Politics in WA

Earlier this month the members of the NWPC-WA’s May Hutton Society were treated to an intimate discussion on women in politics with three top political consultants/strategists: Cathy Allen, principal of the Connections Group who works with women candidates around the world; AlisonPeters, pollster who works with candidates to develop research-based messaging, principal of Alison Peters Consulting; and Erin McCallum, President of Enterprise Washington, a non-partisan statewide organization that recruits, trains and helps elect business minded individuals. Joining us for the conversation were Rep. Laurie Jinkins, Seattle City Councilmember Sally Clark, past Rep. Laura Ruderman, and past candidate for the House, Marcee Stone. Here is some of the great information our presenters shared:

Cathy Allen:

Nine of the western hemisphere countries have over 25% women in political office right now.

In Canada’s election earlier this month, they reached 24.7% women elected at the national level.

12 years ago we had a record number of women in WA legislature at over 40%, now down to 31.3%.

Less than 32% of the mayors in King County are women, down from 40% four years ago.

Women typically turn out in numbers 11% higher than men to vote. This Gender Gap will be 4-6% this year. 

Ironically, more men vote for women than women vote for women.

Top issues that will be on the ballot this year:

#1 issue- Too many chickens in the coup being brought by the Humane Society will have the most money spent on it.

#2= legalizing marijuana/medical marijuana

#3= rolling back initiative changing rules

Other issues:  Collective bargaining, dealing with taxes

Reapportionment is the best time for women to run, watch for open seats! Women win at 2-3x the average rate during reapportionment.

What can you do to help get more women elected?  

Invest in women at the national level. Commit to donating monthly from your credit card to a woman running for Congress.

We need to be the eyes and ears of women who could run for something, but make sure they fit the district they are running in.

Look locally and regionally for future women candidates.

Support organizations that identify and support women candidates, we need to bankroll them to win.

Important to stop slide of women candidates at local and King County level.

Erin McCallum:

Lessons learned in 2010: critical to recruit and back candidates that match the district they are running in, not all do. 

The business community is very diverse. The prototype business owner in Washington is fiscally conservative and socially progressive. Business and economy issues make as good a sound bite as social issues do. 

Women business owners are fiscally conscientious, highly value quality of life issues, and issues like education and social justice.

We need find the best and brightest stars to build a farm team to build leadership in 2012, 2014 and beyond. 

Women are amazing candidates because they are kinder, more prone to negotiating, and they know how to make things work, as they don’t see things in merely black and white. 

The issue in 2012 will continue to be about job and health of the private sector. Women candidates should embrace this and not be intimidated by their male counterparts. We have significant female CEO’s who are bright, driven and focused. Let’s engage them and their employees in the political arena just like everyone else.  

Alison Peters:

Biggest news this year was the Census data. Learned a great deal about women:

Women are earning bachelors and advanced degrees at a higher rate than men

Negative pay disparity is 30% nationwide.

Women who are heading households are earning the least of all households.

A recent CNN poll showed that the President’s favorability rating didn’t jump that high after the death of Osama Bin Laden. The jobs report and gas prices seem to most greatly affect the favorability rating.

Olympia issues to pay attention to: redistricting, voter-approved initiatives that restrict the legislature’s ability to act or lead.

[nwpcwa-blog]

An Interview on Women's Leadership with Rep. Ruth Kagi

This interview with Ruth Kagi, State Representative in the 32nd District in Shoreline, was conducted by Guest Blogger, Tarja Kallinen.

Q: When was the first time you were in a leadership role?

A: I worked 15 years for US Dept. of Labor and helped start a new regional office for the Employment and Training Administration. Later I chaired the Washington Council for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect. I also worked on the King County Commission on Children and Youth. When I first ran for office I was terrified about standing before people. I was a policy nerd, not used to being in front of large crowds. Experience has changed all that. What I discovered was that it was important to learn from your mistakes.

Q: Can you think of a turning point or a ‘defining moment’ in your life that describes your values as a leader?

A: After getting involved in community work I became very committed to child welfare. It was a very positive experience.

Q: What is your leadership style now? Has it changed over time?

A: The longer I’ve been in the legislature the more willing I am to be bold and take risks. I started out as a policy wonk but with growth and experience began to understand that sometimes you need major reform and not just tweaking here and there. Things need to be shaken up. People don’t like change, but I am now more willing to make change happen. Change brings new opportunities.

Q: Are there obstacles you face as a woman in a leadership position; if so, how do you deal with them? How would you advice younger women who aspire to lead?

A: Washington State has been very supportive of women. I have not noticed any specific obstacles. I would advice younger women to get involved with the issues and with your community, find your passion and gain confidence. Learn the issues and become knowledgeable. Most women get involved with politics after someone else asks them. Women work harder to really learn the issues before getting involved.

Q: How has leadership changed in the digital age?

A: I am old-fashioned; I do not like the digital age, it's a huge distraction. But I realize that I must learn. I need to find a way to communicate because the local newspaper in Lake Forest Park has disappeared! I write e-memos every two weeks and a newsletter once each legislative session. I talk with Shoreline Patch, a local online newspaper, to disseminate information. I conduct town halls, and sends emails.

Q: What are some of the challenges of social media/transparency you have encountered?

A: Younger legislators are more comfortable with digital media; I am not, and learning takes time - which is not available during legislative session. I use email and I find that easy.

Q: Can a leader show vulnerability?

A: I do all the time! Vulnerability is part of being genuine, building trust with people.

Q: How do you ensure credibility in the age of digital media?

A: I am disgusted with the media because they focus on the wrong issues and manipulate the issues. I am worried about where it will lead. What will happen to PBS when they try to cut the funding? What will happen when we lose our newspapers - our watchdogs?

Q: Are women’s stories different in politics?

A: Yes, women have a more difficult time getting and staying involved because of family and small children - they struggle with feelings of guilt. Women are more interested in children’s issues, health care etc.

Q: How do you understand ‘authentic leadership’?

A: Authentic leadership is about being direct and up-front about issues, such as budget, etc. It is about being genuine, and understanding the vision, where we are going and sharing that with people. It is about bringing people together.

[nwpcwa-blog]

The Other Side of the Notebook

By Guest Blogger, Jean Godden I am among a number of women journalists who have exchanged their press cards for a name tag that reads: “the Honorable.” It’s a modest trend – journalists as politicians. But, frankly, it’s not all that surprising women journalists would aspire to office. I want to salute three other women journalists who joined local City Councils in the recent past: Stacy Goodman, a longtime reporter for the Issaquah Press, recently became an Issaquah City Council member, beating more than a dozen other topnotch applicants for the job. The opening happened when Maureen McCarry had to resign her seat due to a terrible illness. Jane Meyer Brahm, a longtime reporter for the Mercer Island Reporter, won the appointment contest for the open seat left by Steve Litzow’s election to the State Senate. And, my own Seattle City Council colleague, Sally J. Clark, got her start as a print journalist reporting and editing for many of our local and regional newspapers. I am hardly alone when it comes to women journalists serving in public office: the lines between journalism and public service are actually quite close.   Every women journalist I know, while covering a council/legislative meeting, has reflected on decisions made:  “What a dumb decision. I know I could do better”?  That’s an understandable human response, one that most journalists, if they’re being honest, will admit to having entertained. That was my reaction on more than one occasion during the years I covered City Hall. However, whenever I thought about quitting journalism for an uncertain run for office, I promptly dismissed the idea.  It would have meant crossing a wide divide. Newspapers do not allow their employees to back anyone for office or contribute to a political campaign or even to a political cause, much less run for office. And yet, after many years of apolitical activity, I longed to have a bigger stake in the city’s future, a bigger opportunity for public service.  Short story:  I finally talked to a political consultant about my chances of running for the Seattle City Council. Had I taken leave of my senses?  Probably. But, with the consultant’s advice that I had “good positives” and strong name familiarity, I quit my job and, with no guarantees and six opponents, I plunked down my $835 and filed for office. Over the next few weeks I learned that journalism does not prepare one for being a candidate.  Quite the contrary. As a journalist, I was prone to equivocation:  “maybe” and “perhaps” when asked a question. I wore the wrong clothing: an old trench coat and a comfortable pair of loafers. I stumbled when asked what talents I brought to the job. Modesty prevented talking about my good points. But, despite my stumbles and thanks to my long-suffering campaign crew, I did win election in just 100 days, start to finish, and along the way managed to raise $225,000 for my at-large election. If campaigning made me feel clumsy, I found that serving as a councilmember was more natural. As a newspaper columnist, I was used to unfamiliar territory. I had to learn quickly, find answers and confirm facts.  The same is true in elected office. The City Council is faced with many issues and controversies. First order of business is to listen to all sides of an issue, seek out expert advice, learn as much as one can and explore possible solutions. The morning I handed in my resignation, my City Editor hugged me, wished me luck and told me what I could expect.  He said, “We’ll have to cover you harder than any of the others.” He kept his word. The media cover me from the other side of the notebook just as vigorously and dispassionately, if not more so, than any of the other electeds. I would expect no less. Jean Godden is a member of the Seattle City Council and chair of its Budget and Finance Committee. She was a columnist and chronicler of Seattle life for many years at both Seattle daily newspapers.

[nwpcwa-blog]

Limited Service Pregnancy Centers: Unapologetically Selling Women Lies and Deception

This is a battle between “darkness and light,” said Anne Lotierzo, the Executive Director of a crisis pregnancy center located in Fort Pierce, Florida.

Wednesday night NARAL Pro-Choice WA Foundation presented the remarkable documentary 12th & Delaware at the Central Cinema in Seattle.  The Seattle showing was the first stop of a nationwide tour that NARAL Pro-Choice America has organized around the country.  The documentary takes an in depth and up close look at the deceptive practices used by so-called crisis pregnancy centers or Limited Service Pregnancy Centers (LSPCs).  The documentarians spent one year observing the practices of an LSPC in Fort Pierce, Florida. They also documented how that LSPC’s presence has impacted the abortion clinic located right across the street.  You can find more information about this documentary and the co-directors, Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, here.  

Wednesday’s presentation was followed by a panel discussion that included presentations from representatives for NARAL Pro-Choice WA, Legal Voice, a woman that visited an LSPC in Tacoma, and a Seattle ob-gyn.  Washington State would be the first state in the nation to hold these LSPCs accountable to the women that seek out their services.  The NWPC-WA has endorsed the Limited Service Pregnancy Center Accountability Act.  

The Limited Service Pregnancy Center Accountability Act (HB 1366) would require LSPCs to:

ü  protect the privacy of health care information they collect from women; ü  provide pregnancy test results immediately; ü  disclose that they do not provide services or referrals for abortion or comprehensive birth control, and   ü  disclose that they do not provide medical care for pregnant women.

Similar laws have been passed in Austin, Texas, Baltimore, and most recently in NYC.  The Baltimore ordinance was recently declared unconstitutional by a federal district court judge who concluded that the law regulated the content of speech by mandating “forced speech” in violation of the First Amendment.  WA State Attorney General Rob McKenna, relying on that federal court decision in Baltimore, has indicated that he thinks LSPC Accountability Act is similarly unconstitutional. 

In response to the NYC Council’s vote in favor of the LSPC disclosure bill, Sabrina Shulman, political director for NARAL Pro-Choice New York, stated "It has been neither coincidence, nor by accident that CPCs have been deceiving women about their true nature.  Until now, deception has been their business model.  This needs to stop.  Today it will."

The packed Central Cinema viewers got a first-hand look at how the people that staff these LSPCs make no apology for the fact that they exist solely to lure and deceive women – to trick them into thinking the facility they are entering is a licensed medical clinic or an abortion clinic.  LSPCs lure vulnerable, oftentimes very young, and poor women with the promise of a free pregnancy test.  The Executive Director (ED) chronicled in the documentary and her staff directly admitted that they are engaged in a battle to end all abortions in the U.S. 

They explain that they really are salespersons.  According to the ED there are two kinds of women entering her facility.  One kind is the fearless woman that has already made up her mind to get an abortion; the other kind of woman is fearful.  The fearless woman needs to be “hooked” right away or else she is going to figure out that this is not a real medical facility and walk out the door.  The other fearful woman is much easier to manipulate and wear down. 

The strategy used against the fearless woman: when she asks directly “do you perform abortions?”  The answer is always delay, delay, delay.  Never answer her question but start a conversation with her instead. 

LSPC staffers admit most women calling or coming through the front door have no idea what kind of facility they have just called or walked into.  Staffers explain that they need to avoid answering questions to get a woman that calls on the phone through that front door.  While addressing her staff, the ED says – “maybe that’s not fair to that woman – but too bad.”

The next step in the strategy: isolation.

Leave the woman alone in a room with all of LSPC’s prepared written materials and graphic videos; lock her in the room for hours if you need to.  The ED does not see this as being deceitful because the priest that oversees the facility tells her it is OK to do this to the women coming into the facility.  “If it weren’t OK, Father Tom would not allow me to do it.” 

That same priest also claims that the pro-choice movement is violent and militant while the anti-abortion movement is peaceful.  This despite the fact that the documentary shows the great lengths the abortion providers endure to hide their identity, including having to be transported to and from the clinic with a sheet over the doctor’s head.  Doctors often wear bullet proof vests and carry guns to protect themselves.  The one doctor that was disguised in the documentary was being stalked by one of these “peaceful” protesters so he could discover his identity and start stalking him at his home.

The ED explains that they get a lot of women coming into their facility thinking it is an abortion clinic.  LSPCs reinforce this confusion by strategically setting up very near abortion clinics or reproductive health care facilities; this Florida LSPC was right across the street from an abortion clinic that was picketed daily by anti-abortion protesters.  The protesters harassed the staff and berated the women entering the clinic either calling them murderers or promising them that they will pay their rent and give them money to care for their other children as long as they don’t have the abortion. 

Many LSPCs not only set up near abortion clinics but they place signs in front of the LSPC to let women think it is an abortion clinic.  Care Net in Washington State explicitly encourages their network of facilities to situate themselves as close as possible to abortion clinics or other reproductive health service facilities.  A lot of LSPCs also open up near college campuses and in low-income areas of a particular community, often targeting students and women of color. 

This is particularly problematic for low-income women in Washington State seeking to get welfare benefits for prenatal care or for an abortion.  In order to get welfare benefits a woman must provide independent verification of her pregnancy.  The Washington State Department of Social and Health Services accepts pregnancy test results from LSPCs in Washington yet these same LSPCs remain completely unregulated by the state.  This is but one of the reasons we need to get the LSPC Accountability Act passed in Washington.  The health and welfare of women and their unborn children is jeopardized when LSPCs intentionally delay pregnancy results and often refuse to provide results to a woman if they suspect any possibility that she may seek out an abortion. 

The ED chronicled in the documentary encourages one woman that she should stay with an abusive partner so she will have enough money to raise her child.  Speaking with another woman, that she tries to befriend by buying her McDonalds, the ED tells her that condoms are only 85% effective.  When the pregnant woman pushes back against that misinformation the ED continues to besiege her with a litany of lies and medically inaccurate information. 

One of the more disturbing tactics involves lying to women about how far along they are in their pregnancy after they submit to an ultrasound.  They sometimes tell women they are only a few weeks pregnant and they have plenty of time to make a decision about their pregnancy.  Other times they tell women they are well beyond the timeframe when they can get a legal abortion.  These tactics lead to delays in seeking out abortion services and work particularly well on very young girls who are frightened about their parents finding out about a pregnancy. 

The documentary also chronicles the impact on the staff from the abortion clinic across the street.  The abortion providers discuss the extreme security measures they have been forced to use to protect themselves from violent extremists. 

The House version of the LSPC Accountability Act (HB 1366) has not been voted on yet.  Women deserve to know whether the facility they are entering when they need a free pregnancy test or abortion counseling provides the services they are seeking out.  Women should not be lied to, isolated, or manipulated when making personal choices that affect their lives simply because someone else has decided they should be making those choices for women instead.  Women are capable of making their own medical choices – and those decisions must be informed decisions.  If LSPCs in Washington have nothing to hide then they should not have any objection to a minimum standard of transparency. 

Please call your representatives in the House today and urge them to vote on this critical bill.  

[nwpcwa-blog]

Keeping Seattle’s Working Moms Healthy and Safe: Seattle’s Paid Sick Days Campaign

Is Seattle ready for a paid sick days law?  InSeattle 42% of the workforce has no paid sick leave.  Far more alarming is the fact that in Seattle, 78% of restaurant workers, 55% of retail workers, and 29% of health care workers do not have paid sick leave.  The increased likelihood of spreading contagious diseases is something workers and employers should be very concerned with.  Rising health care costs combined with a sickened workforce is bad business for all employers. 

Paid sick days benefits would create a healthier and more secure Seattle workforce.  It would ensure that workers could stay home when they are sick without losing a day’s pay.  When sick workers are forced to go to work they not only increase their own healthcare care expenses but those of their coworkers.  Sick workers cost employers productivity and spread disease.  For workers in the services industry, like restaurant workers and grocery store cashiers, they risk making the public sick as well.  InWashington State most workers in the food service industry or those working directly with the public have no access to paid sick leave. 

The workforce segregation resulting in women working mostly in health care services, child care, and retail in Washington means that women take the brunt of the consequences of having no access to paid sick leave.  The lack of paid sick leave is particularly troubling for working mothers.  When working mothers cannot afford to take a day off to care for a sick child that child is oftentimes forced to go to school, spreading disease to other children and teachers. 

In King County 69% of school-age children have both parents working.  In fact, according to a 2010 Center for American Progress study in Washington State 37.4% of working moms were breadwinners. In that study the term “breadwinners” was defined as “…single mothers who work and married mothers who earn as much or more than their husbands.” In the same study, the term “co-breadwinners” was defined as “…all breadwinners as well as wives who bring home at least 25 percent of the couple’s earnings, but less than half.”  In Washington State working mothers who were identified as “co-breadwinners” was 22.6%.  And working mothers who were identified as either breadwinners or co-breadwinners totaled 60%. 

With long term unemployment hitting men harder than women, women are increasingly becoming the primary breadwinners for many families.  In Washington State, 60% of children under age 6 and 71% of school-aged children had both parents working in 2008.  And another effect of workforce segregation is that women are more likely than men to have part time jobs that offer no benefits at all. 

For women who are victims of domestic violence having access to paid sick leave is critical for their health and safety, as well as for the safety of their children.  In 2008 Washington State enacted the Domestic Violence Leave Act.  The Act requires employers to provide their employees with “…reasonable time off to attend court and take steps to ensure their and their children’s safety if the employee is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking.”  However simply because you can take time off does not mean you can afford the lost pay associated with taking that time off.  Not having the financial freedom to take days off to deal with extreme cases of potential violence can result in dire consequences for women and their children.  The protections of the Act may therefore be meaningless for women living paycheck to paycheck.  Paid sick days benefits would ease a tremendous burden for these vulnerable women. 

The 2006 San Francisco paid sick days law has been proven to be an overwhelming model of success.  In fact, a recent survey detailing the impact of the San Francisco law conducted by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research found:

San Francisco’s PSLO has had a tremendous impact on workers’ lives with little to no impact on the city’s businesses. Two-thirds of the employers surveyed now support the PSLO. They overwhelmingly report that their profits haven’t declined as a result of the law and two-thirds report no difficulties with implementation.

The primary reason that businesses found little impact from the law was that workers generally only took advantage of their sick days when they really needed to do so.  And more than half of the workers surveyed in San Francisco said they benefitted from the law. 

In the coming weeks a coalition of community leaders will begin laying the groundwork to let Seattleites know how they can benefit from paid sick days benefits.  The NWPC-WA fully supports this paid sick days campaign and we will be providing periodic updates for our readers.  

Posted by: Antoinette Bonsignore

[nwpcwa-blog]

The GOP's Ongoing War on America's Women and Children: Demonizing Women's Choices

The sponsors of “The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” (H.R.3) do not seek to codify the existing the Hyde Amendment to prevent federal funding of abortions – there is no federal funding of abortions in the U.S.  The sponsors of H.R.3 seek to go far beyond the Hyde Amendment to prevent all women from obtaining abortion services.  In 1976 the Hyde Amendment created a two tier system that discriminates against poor women seeking abortions.  But now H.R.3 would increase taxes on people and small businesses by specifically targeting private health insurance plans that cover abortion.  More than 80% of health insurance plans cover abortion and those plans would become ineligible for government reimbursements for health care costs.  It will raise taxes on anyone with private insurance that covers abortion regardless of whether you use the abortion coverage in your plan or not.  The inevitable consequence will be that insurance companies will stop covering abortion services. 

According to a Guttmacher Institute study “…87% of typical employer-based insurance policies in 2002 covered medically necessary or appropriate abortions.” H.R.3 would effectively ban abortion coverage in the new health insurance exchanges that will be created under the Affordable Care Act in 2014. 

H.R3 would also impose tax penalties on those who pay for abortion care or coverage by: ·         Denying tax credits to employers or other entities that pay for health plans   that cover abortion ·         Denying tax credits to individuals or entities that pay for abortion care ·         Disallowing medical deductions for payments for any health plan that     includes abortion coverage or for any medical expenses related to abortion   care ·         Treating as income any amounts paid for an abortion from a tax-preferred   trust or account, such as a health savings account Yet the GOP’s war on   women goes well beyond H.R.3. 

The Chairman of the Appropriations Committee Congressman Hal Rogers (R-KY) has introduced a litany of proposed budgets cuts that will have dangerous consequences for women and children.  Some of those cuts include:

Cutting $327 million from Family Planning (Title X Family Planning program enacted in 1970)

Cutting $758 million from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)

Cutting $210 million from Maternal and Child Health Block Grants

Cutting $1.3 billion from Community Health Centers

Cutting $96 million from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

Cutting $400 million from Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Contingency Fund

So not only does the GOP want to remove access to abortion coverage for poor women, but now for all women; but they are now trying to deny women access to birth control --- which is the best way women can prevent unintended pregnancies. 

But the assault on women goes even further with Congressman Mike Pence (R-Ind.) introducing H.R.217 the “Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act,” is his never ending quest to defund Planned Parenthood.  Now Pence is getting an assist from Live Action and Lila Rose.  Lila Rose is an associate of James O’Keefe.  O’Keefe targeted ACORN offices in 2009 with a similar strategy and convinced the House of Representatives to defund ACORN in September 2009, which was then controlled by Democrats.  Lila Rose and Live Action are following that same strategy and have released a series of highly edited “sting” videos allegedly showing Planned Parenthood employees counseling sex traffickers on how to get underage girls abortions and birth control.  This is the evidence that Mike Pence is using to attack Planned Parenthood’s funding despite the fact that Planned Parenthood immediately contacted the FBI and the Justice Department about this sex trafficking ring, which of course turned out to be an elaborate hoax.  

So even though these videos have been discredited by every legitimate news organization because liberal groups and Media Matters exposed the hoax, Mike Pence, Jean Schmidt (R-OH), Virginia Foxx (R-NC) , Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) , Renee Ellmers (R-NC), Ann Marie Buerkle (R-NY), and Andy Harris (R-MD) have all joined forces with Lila Rose to “expose” and defund Planned Parenthood.  They also joined forces at a press conference on February 10th to justify passing H.R.217 and their attack on women’s health care.  Pence issued the following statement:

The recent release of an undercover video exposing duplicity and potential criminality by an employee of Planned Parenthood is an outrage.  Every American should be shocked that an employee of the largest recipient of federal funds under Title X has been recorded aiding and abetting underage sex trafficking.  The time to deny any and all funding to Planned Parenthood is now.  In the wake of yet another scandal involving Planned Parenthood, I urge Congress to move the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act to the floor for immediate consideration.

By relying on this smear campaign against Planned Parenthood, these GOP leaders are seeking to eliminate vital health care services for vulnerable women throughout the country. The attacks on access to abortion services combined with the attacks on all family planning services demonstrates that the House Republican leadership is concerned with one thing and one thing only: continuing their ongoing war against the health and welfare of America’s women and children by any means necessary.

Posted by: Antoinette Bonsignore

[nwpcwa-blog]

Status of Women in the WA State Legislature

With the late loss of Rep. Dawn Morrell in the 25th legislative district the results of the 2010 election are final and while women did not fare as badly as we had initially feared, the outcome is not a trend we want to see continue.

In the House we will have a net gain of one woman, and in the Senate a net loss of two women for a total loss of one woman. Women now make up just  31.97% of our Legislature.

Some painful losses in 2010:

Loss of our only native American woman in the Legislature, Sen. Claudia Kauffman

Loss of our only African American woman in the Legislature, Rosa Franklin (retired)

Loss of Rep. Lynn Kessler as Majority Leader (retired), and the loss of Rep. Dawn Morrell as Caucus Chair

Some Bright Spots:

We gained our first open lesbian in the Legislature with Rep. Laurie Jinkins in the 27th LD

We gained another woman in our congressional delegation with Jaime Herrera, though Herrera is not pro-choice and wasn't endorsed by the Caucus

Washington is ranked 6th in the nation for women in our state legislature

We must stay vigilant in our efforts to identify opportunities for women to run and to make sure we have a great pipeline of women who are ready!

[nwpcwa-blog]

WA State Attorney General Rob McKenna Declares the Proposed Limited Service Pregnancy Center Accountability Act Unconstitutional

On February 2nd the Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee held a hearing taking testimony from supporters and opponents of the Limited Service Pregnancy Center Accountability Act (SB 5274/HB 1366). The proposed Act will help protect women from some of the more deceptive practices at Limited Service Pregnancy Centers (LSPC) or so called Crisis Pregnancy Centers. Kathy Buchli, Counsel for the Committee, informed the Committee that Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna believes that the Act is unconstitutional because it violates the 1st Amendment. Ms. Buchli stated that Mr. McKenna believes the Act violates the 1st Amendment because it requires “compelled speech” and suppresses freedom of expression. Mr. McKenna appears to be taking his cues directly from Maryland federal district court judge Marvin J. Garbis. On January 28th Judge Garbis declared a similar Baltimore City ordinance regulating LSPCs unconstitutional. Ms. Buchli announced that Mr. McKenna also thinks the Act goes far beyond the Baltimore law regarding violations of the 1st Amendment. Throughout the oftentimes contentious hearing, where Committee members argued and talked over one another, the recent Baltimore ruling permeated much of the discussion.

Three Republican Committee members agreed with the Attorney General’s assessment that the Act is unconstitutional. Republican Senators Cheryl Pflug, Adam Kline, and Mike Carrell repeatedly cited specific language from the Baltimore decision to express their belief that the Act requires “forced speech” from LSPCs in violation of the 1st Amendment. These same Committee members also insisted that the Act’s disclosure requirements would inevitably lead to LSPCs going out of business because disgruntled women would bring frivolous lawsuits and end up suing LSPCs out of business. The primary sponsor of the bill, Senator Kevin Ranker (D), stated that the Act is solely designed to ensure that women receive accurate and honest information at LSPCs in order to make informed medical choices. He rejected the argument that the Act would eventually put LSPCs out of business. Some women spoke out about being denied their pregnancy test results at LSPCs and how they were told lies about the risks associated with abortion. Senator Pflug repeatedly challenged gynecologist Dr. Kate McLean regarding whether abortion increases a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer. Senator Pflug was shocked when Dr. McLean stated there is no evidence that abortion increases a woman’s risk of getting breast cancer. The Senator insisted that there is indeed evidence showing a correlation between abortion and breast cancer and rejected the notion that LSPCs provide women with inaccurate medical information. The most direct testimony referencing the Baltimore decision came from Spokane attorney Jeff Smith. He too stated that the Act violates the 1st Amendment because it requires compelled speech. Going even further, he stated that the Act also violates the equal protection clause because it discriminates against a specific political ideology. Mr. Smith agreed with Rob McKenna’s assessment that the Act goes far beyond the Baltimore ordinance and would therefore be unenforceable. Attorney Shankar Narayan, Legislative Director for the ACLU WA, countered Mr. Smith’s arguments about the Baltimore ruling telling the Committee that the Act does not restrict free speech and does not limit the content of speech. In fact, the ACLU WA opposed last year’s proposed LSPC legislation precisely because they concluded that last year’s legislation did regulate the content of speech. He defended the constitutionality of the Act’s disclosure and external signage requirements explaining that the requirements do not amount to the regulation of the content of speech. Instead, the disclosure requirements are narrowly tailored to address the specific problem of women being confused about what services LSPCs offer and more importantly, do not offer. How will the Baltimore decision affect the future of the Washington State LSPC Accountability Act? How will WA State Attorney General McKenna’s viewpoint impact legislative support for the Act? How will his stance affect future litigation challenging the constitutionality of the Act if the Act becomes law? Call your legislator at 1-800-562-6000 and ask them to support the Limited Service Pregnancy Center Accountability Act (HB 1366/SB 5274). Let’s work together to protect women’s privacy, access to accurate and honest medical information, and access to timely reproductive health care.

Posted by: Antoinette Bonsignore