Wooing women voters by talking economics

We’ve cautioned before that “women voters” are not a monolithic bloc that can be won over with a single message. But as the economic downturn has hit women especially hard, it’s easy to see why Barack Obama is trying to appeal to women by discussing the economy — hitting on the issue of equal pay and highlighting Lilly Ledbetter’s story.

Obama was an original co-sponsor of the legislation to reverse the result in Ledbetter’s case; McCain opposes the bill because, he said in April, it “opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems.” Well, yes, that would be the point of a law prohibiting pay discrimination.
The Obama campaign has asked Clinton to talk about Ledbetter when she campaigns for him. Obama, who didn’t focus much on the issue during the primary campaign, hosted a meeting Monday on pay equity; the campaign released a memo contrasting Obama and McCain on women’s issues. As I sat down to write this column, an e-mail arrived from the Democratic convention announcing that Ledbetter would be speaking there.

That’s all well and good, but it’s worth bringing up that it’s tough for even the most impassioned campaign rhetoric to connect with real life. This piece from Salon last week, about a middle-class mother who takes her children to a soup kitchen for the first time, drives that point home. She describes her situation this way:

It had been a hard decision for me to go in the first place. We had a house full of food, mostly from the food bank, and some staples friends who were moving had given us. I was employed as a secretary for the county, a job that didn’t make use of my graduate degree or my intelligence but had let me keep the kids in the same school and city after my divorce. I made a decent wage. I had health insurance and dental insurance. On my desk was a packet of new retirement and savings options. But summer child care was $1,800 a month for my three kids, and the child support I received from their father was a paltry sum mandated by the state. It didn’t even begin to cover the cost of one kid’s child care for a single summer month. We didn’t qualify for WIC vouchers or food stamps. The previous week, I had swallowed my pride and driven my old Subaru to a local food bank. The women there were kind and gave me a box filled with cans of tuna and bags of pasta. I was only allowed to get one box per month, though, and what they gave me would last a week, maybe 10 days. I was looking into weeks of hunger. The Dining Room served dinner to families only twice a week.

And the experience leads her to this conclusion,

But the moment I walked into the soup kitchen — the moment I acknowledged, publicly, that I could not provide food for myself or my children (which is why the soup kitchen is so much more difficult than the food bank) — is the moment that my ability to believe in the politics of this country was forever altered. I know why poor people have historically low voter-turnout rates. If you vote, you acknowledge that you believe in the system. And to believe in the system when you’re at the very bottom, when you’ve watched the chrome and ink-black SUVs drive by while you’re packing your own beater with dried beans and lentils, to believe at that point is fucking painful. You either say the system works and you’ve earned your place, or you concede that there is something wrong and there might not be any way to fix it. The entire summer of 2007, as I struggled to keep us fed, I hated thinking of politics, an unusual characteristic for me. It hurt to listen to any presidential candidate talk about the working poor, and not because they weren’t genuine, but because all their talk was just that — talk. It was like listening to my former self, the one who didn’t know how bad things could get.

Stories like this get across what’s tough to convey with broad articles and polling about how the economy is affecting women. There’s a wide gulf between the way the economy is discussed and how it’s lived.
Related:
Obama on women and work
Life on WIC