In politics, the sins
of the husband may be visited upon the wife, but usually not upon
the widow.
The public reaction
to the candidacies of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Jean Carnahan
for the U.S. Senate spoke volumes about the how women's opportunities
in politics are still tied to their husbands, living and dead.
Hillary was a real
candidate for public office, properly nominated, actively running
and now the victor in her race as the new Senator from New York.
Jean was a ghost candidate.
She was not nominated, was not running herself as a candidate,
and the voters of Missouri couldn't vote for her directly on election
day. It was her deceased husband, former Governor Mel Carnahan,
whose name appeared on the ballot. The voters did 'elect'
Carnahan on Tuesday and the current Governor said that he will
choose the candidate's widow to occupy the seat until a new election
can be held in two years.
There had been much
public sniping at Hillary's candidacy, and not just by Republican
partisans. There was none at Jean's though it was, at best,
a manipulation of the political system for partisan ends (i.e.
to get another Democratic seat in the Senate). This has been a
practice in other races over the years when some wives have been
appointed, in most cases, after the death of a House or Senate
incumbent.
Why the difference?
Hillary is a political
wife. Jean is a political widow.
Despite the greater
public acceptance of women in political life, wives can still
be seen as appendages of their husbands. They carry his
baggage along with his name but if he dies, his wife still may
keep the name, but usually loses the baggage associated with his
legacy.
For political wives
-- women married to politicians -- this means that, in most cases,
her status rises and falls with his. No matter how independent
her actions or her ideas, it is her husband's position that counts
most. Traditionally, the typical political wife left politics
when her husband did.
Hillary defied that
tradition. While taking advantage of the name, she struck
out on her own even before her husband left the presidency.
For this she was criticized and even condemned.
Jean operated within
traditional attitudes toward women. She acted as her husband's
surrogate, and served his party by helping it to gain a Senate
seat.
Although being the
wife of a prominent political man certainly boosts one's name
recognition, there could be more advantage to being a widow in
this instance. When a political wife becomes a political widow,
she combines the advantages of her husband's prior status, name
and good will with the independence to forge her own path.
For the first third
of the twentieth century, political widows in the United States
were more successful in finding a place for themselves in politics
than most other political women in national politics. In
the second third, women increased their presence in politics independently
of their husbands, but it still helped to be a widow. In
the last third, widowhood was no longer the stepping stone it
had once been. But in the year 2000 we found that it doesn't
hurt.
Of the first fourteen
women elected to Congress (between 1916 and 1932) six were widows
of incumbents, and three were daughters of famous political men.
Of the first ten women
to serve as U.S. Senators, five were appointed to fill vacancies
and seven served less than a year. While not all seven were Senatorial
widows, all were elected or appointed solely to hold the seat
open for the men who were expected to run for it.
The three women who
served a full Senate term all succeeded their husbands.
Hattie Caraway (D. Ark.) initially filled her dead husband's term
but was twice re-elected. Margaret Chase Smith (R. Me.)
succeeded her husband in the House, then ran for the Senate on
her own. Maurine Neuberger (D. Ore.) replaced her incumbent
husband when he died two days before the deadline to file for
reelection. It was 1978 before a woman was elected to a
full term who was not a political widow; Nancy Landon Kassenbaum
(R. KS) was a political daughter who had not held public office
prior to her election to the Senate.
Like Kassenbaum, Hillary
Rodham Clinton and Jean Carnahan had not previously run for public
office. But in this case, it was only Hillary Rodham Clinton
who carried baggage, some of it quite negative, some quite positive,
along with her famous political name. She is a political
wife. Jean is a political widow. And now, they are both
members of the U.S. Senate.
Jo Freeman is a political scientist and attorney. Her most recent book is At Berkeley in the Sixties: Education of an Activist (Indiana U. Press 2004). Her previous book, A Room at a Time: How Women Entered Party Politics, (Rowman and Littlefield, 2000) was reviewed by Emily Mitchell, a Senior Women Web Culture Watch critic.
Jo's next book, We Will Be Heard: Women's Struggles for Political Power in the United States, will be published by Rowman and Littlefield in March.
Other books include The Politics of Women's Liberation, winner of the 1975 American Political Science Association's prize for the Best Scholarly Book on Women and Politics; five editions of Women: A Feminist Perspective (ed.). Jo edited Social Movements of the Sixties and Seventies and (with Victoria Johnson) as well as Waves of Protest: Social Movements Since the Sixties. She has a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Chicago and a J.D. from NYU's School of Law. Visit her website, www.jofreeman.com and email her at joreen@jofreeman.com
©Jo Freeman for SeniorWomenWeb
