A Comparative Case Study on Why Women Run for Public Office : Hillary Rodham Clinton & Elizabeth Hanford Dole" (1999)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Honors Theses Student Research 1999 A comparative case study on why women run for public office :i H llary Rodham Clinton & Elizabeth Hanford Dole Ashley Elizabeth Lorenz Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses Part of the Leadership Studies Commons Recommended Citation Lorenz, Ashley Elizabeth, "A comparative case study on why women run for public office : Hillary Rodham Clinton & Elizabeth Hanford Dole" (1999). Honors Theses. 1199. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses/1199 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Comparative Case Study on Why Women Run for Public Office: Hillary Rodham Clinton & Elizabeth Hanford Dole: By Ashley Elizabeth Lorenz Senior Project Jepson School of Leadership Studies University of Richmond Richmond, Virginia May,1999 A ComparativeCase Study on Why Women Run forPublic Office: HillaryRodham Clinton & ElizabethHanford Dole: AshleyElizabeth Lorenz Leadership Studies SeniorProject April 14, 1999 Dr. FredricJablin. Advisor Table or Contents I. Prologue pp. 1-2 n. Introduction &Review of Literature 3-15 ill. Methodology 16-21 IV. Case Study: HillaryRodham Clinton 22-36 V. Case Study:Elizabeth Hanford Dole 37-50 VI. Analysis 51-62 VII. Conclusions 63-65 "Politicalleadership is a complexphenomenon in which are linked the capacities, skills, and ambitions of the leader and the wants, needs, andlor fears of the followers. Dominance is one determinant of leadershipcapabilities, but ambitionand skills are also important determinants1 of influence. Power, it is sometimes said. goes to those who seek it -providedthat they havethe skillsneeded to translatethe personalpredisposition into an interpersonalreality. " In whatways do women leaders in politics fitthe generic parameters of political leadership expressed in the above passage? As women are still vecymuch theminority in the national politicalarena, it may be surmisedthat most women would not fit into such a description. Leadership scholarBarbara Kellennan talks aboutleadership in the political contextbeing contingent upon dominance and deference. Traditionally, the men dominate and 2 the women defer. Thus. from a leadership scholar's perspective, an obvious point of interest wouldbe to studywhether or not women political leaders exhibit specificleadership styles and behaviorsthat enable them to participate in a male-dominated realm. Leadership in the political contextis verymuch based uponthe artof persuasion. A politician's ability to persuade others to follow in his or her direction is a key componentof theirsuccess. So do women political leadersrealJy defer to theirmale coUeagues? Frommy own exploration into this subject, and my analysis of twowomen political leadersin particular,I cannot find a word more misrepresentative of their leadership stylesthan that of deference. In fact, throughout the course of the following study, women politicalleaders have provento be strong-willed, aggressive, competitive. ambitious and disciplined - a11 of thosetraits so often attributed to theirmale colleagues. Throughout the course of their lifetimesthese women have developed strong political leadershipcapabi1ities as a result of their socialization andexperiences from childhood 1 Kirkpatrick.Jeane. TheNew Presidential Elite . NewYork: Russell SageFOlllldation and The Twentieth CenturyFund. 1976. 2 Duerst-Lahti,Georgia & RM. Kelly. GenderPower, Leadership, and Governance. AnnArbor: The Universityof MichiganPr ess. 1995. 2 onward. Thereforewe will walkwith them through their journeys, andin the end we will find thatthese women exhibitall of theleadership facets listed inthe abovequote - dominance, competitiveness, influence, ambitionandpower. Now, whetheror not thesequalities mean that these women will be goodpoliticians is the subjectof an entirely differentstudy. Thepurpose of this study, however, is to show thatthe leadershipof thesewomen is breaking down traditional leadershipstereotypes of the past. We lookat the presenceof womenleaders in the political realmas anomalies, whereaswe shouldview their presenceas necessaryand imperative to carryour government into the21st Century. Introduction/LiteraJureReview As our political history evolves, slowly but surelymore and more womenare running for public office. What are the things that propel women to run for local, state, or federal leadership positions? Arethere certain factorst hat are contingent upon their embarkment into the political arena? The answersto these questions all contributeto the "creation," if you will, of a political woman. In order to better understandthese factors and their effects, willI examinecase studies of two women,Hillary Clinton and ElizabethDole, through the lenses of four such factors including the timing as it relatesto theirlives and possibleentry into politics, the national political climate, and each individual's leadershipdevelopment. Lastly, I will examine the leadership behaviors and styles of these women in relation to leadership in the political context. Both Clinton and Dole are wives of politicians whose careers appearto be on the wane, and, recently, both women havebeen touted as possible Senate, vice-presidential, and even presidential nominees forthe year 2000 elections. Is there a pattern that wecan discern and uncoverabout a woman's decision to run for public office that we can thenuse as a template or model for women of a younger generation? Through the followingcase studiesand analysis, I will attemptto answer this question. Timing of Candidates So asto provide an analyticbasis for this study, it is important to knowthat the theoretical framework I will utilize in this study is of my own creation, based on a number of ideas from various other sources and studies that I found throughout my research process. This paper is an exploration ofmy ownmodel, based on the fourlenses discussed above, as it relates to my quest to understandwhy women run for office. For the purposes of this study, timing is 4 easily defined. I will look at why neither Clintonnor Dole ran foroffice 10, 15, or even 20 years ago versustheir careful consideration of runningin nextyear's upcomingelections. I will examine whethertiming-wise in theirpersonal lives the year2000 is betterto run thanthe previous decade. This analysis will be conductedthrough a thorough examinationof their biographiesas welt as othersources of informationavailable on thesetwo women. For example. for women whomarried are and have familieswith youngchildren, this will oftenbe a considerationbefore opting to run forpublic office. Dole and her husband, Robert, do not have any children. Clinton,however, has daughtera Chelsea, who is currentlya sophomore in college. Therefore theissue of having familiesand timing a run for office wiU mostdirectly correlateto Clinton. Inher book R11gningas.a.W91111u authorLinda Witt writes, '"Motherhood may be revered within thefamily, but it has not been consideredan experienceor credential for holding political office. Overthe years, many women have dealt withthis particular •strategic burden' bywaiting until theirchildren were adultsbefore runningfor a high-visibilityoffice or one faraway from home base."3 In Clinton'scase, Chelsea hasreach ed adulthoodand is going to school farfrom Washington,D.C. As such. perhaps Clinton feels as if she can move on with herlife and acton her politicalambitions. Timing canalso be thought inof tennsof thenumber of opportunitiesthat now exist for women in the political realm. Dole herselflikes to call theseexpanded opportunities a quiet revolution. In her memoirs jointly written withRobert she writes, ••By 1970, 23 million Americanwomen wereemployed fulltime. Eight million more held downpart-time jobs. Forty percent of the female workforcewas married. Whatall this added up to was nothingless than a 3witt, Linda& K. Padget & G. Matthews. Rynnipg Ma Womap. New York: The FreePress. 1995. p9 ri es 4 quiet revolution. " Dole inthis contextwas referring to her abilityto attend law school when it was still unheardof forwomen to do so, all the way upto her two Presidential Cabinetpositions. Day-by-day women are working tobreak through the "glass ceiling." In termsof holding political office, Sue Thomas talks about the importance of there beingopen seats in elections. She believes it is much harder for a woman to beat an incumbent candidate than it is forthem to campaign andwin an openseat. She writes,"Because open seats are so much more easilywo, the chanceto run in such a race can be considered a relatively rare opportunity. Women who seek election forthe first time must eitherchallenge an incumbent or run in an open seatcontest. ChallengeJS winless than l 0% of the time, while open-seatcandidates win slightlymore tha n 5 half thetime." As ofnow, Clinton and Dole are saidto be consideringdifferent offices. There have been reportsthat have so fargone unconfirmedby theFirst Lady herself, that Clinton is 6 consideringa runfor the Senate. Dole,on the other band is said to be consideringa possible 7 bid forthe WhiteHouse. either asvice-president or possibly even president. lt remains to be seen how many openseats there will be in the Senate, or what state Clinton may chooseto run from. Theroad tothe WhiteHouse, however,