We Can Get More Women and People of Color Involved In Politics

We’re just doing it wrong.

Luke Squire is the co-founder and co-Director of LaunchProgress, a group working to recruit, train, and supporting young progressive candidates running for their first state or local office.  
National Journal
Luke Squire
See more stories about...
Luke Squire
April 1, 2014, 6:03 a.m.

It’s been 22 years since voters elec­ted a re­cord five wo­men to the U.S. Sen­ate in a single year. Put­ting five wo­men in the Sen­ate was so mo­ment­ous that 1992 was dubbed “The Year of the Wo­man.” Two dec­ades later, we saw sim­il­ar head­lines as the fe­male head­count in the Sen­ate reached 20. Re­flect­ing on that his­tory, The Wash­ing­ton Post said the 1992 elec­tion “was sup­posed to change everything. But it didn’t — not on the scale once ex­pec­ted.”

One would think young wo­men rep­res­ent the solu­tion to this prob­lem. But in March, a month in which we cel­eb­rated wo­men’s his­tory, Chelsea Clin­ton told an audi­ence at South by South­w­est that she does not have a single fe­male friend with any in­terest in run­ning for of­fice. With a Sen­ate that is 80 per­cent male and 95 per­cent white, this is a ser­i­ous con­cern. From state­houses to your loc­al school board, wo­men are un­der­rep­res­en­ted. Al­though they are 51 per­cent of the U.S. pop­u­la­tion, wo­men are just 24 per­cent of state le­gis­lat­ors. It’s even worse for wo­men of col­or. By 2050, wo­men of col­or will to­geth­er com­prise a ma­jor­ity of Amer­ic­an wo­men. But right now, they hold just 5 per­cent of the coun­try’s state law­maker seats.

There’s a sur­pris­ingly simple solu­tion to elect­ing people to of­fice who bet­ter rep­res­ent the Amer­ica we live in: re­cruit, train, and sup­port these can­did­ates when they first enter pub­lic ser­vice — and re­search shows this is es­pe­cially ap­plic­able to elect­ing wo­men.

That’s ex­actly what Launch­Pro­gress PAC, an or­gan­iz­a­tion I cofoun­ded, did this week when we en­dorsed four young, pro­gress­ive can­did­ates — in­clud­ing two wo­men of col­or — run­ning for Michigan’s State­house. By in­vest­ing in the mil­len­ni­al gen­er­a­tion now, we can build the hu­man in­fra­struc­ture likely to cre­ate a bet­ter fu­ture for all Amer­ic­ans. Here’s how.

Stra­tegic Polit­ic­al In­vest­ing. Un­deni­ably, fed­er­al races mat­ter and de­serve at­ten­tion. The is­sues be­fore Con­gress are co­lossal, and the in­di­vidu­als we elect to those seats are crit­ic­al. However, the in­creas­ing role of big money in polit­ics — $5.3 bil­lion was spent on fed­er­al elec­tions in 2008, and $7 bil­lion in 2012 — means pro­gress­ives need a dif­fer­ent strategy. Re­cruit­ing strong ad­voc­ates and strong cam­paign­ers ready and will­ing to seek lower-level of­fices is crit­ic­al if we want to build the num­ber of these can­did­ates who run for high­er of­fice.

Some people think the solu­tion is big money. If you have a lot of it, it’s easi­er to spend a few mil­lion on mes­saging and me­dia than on can­did­ate train­ing and re­cruit­ment. The no­tori­ous and con­ser­vat­ive Koch broth­ers drop money bombs in states and try to in­flu­ence fed­er­al elec­tions every day with their su­per PAC Amer­ic­ans for Prosper­ity. (Of course, Demo­crats and lib­er­als do this, too.)

But the Koch broth­ers also re­cog­nize how im­port­ant loc­al elec­tions are. Last year, they brought their big-money ap­proach to loc­al races in small cit­ies in Iowa. The res­ults were dis­mal (and hil­ari­ous). No one likes people com­ing in­to their com­munit­ies and telling them what to do.

Like most things in life, throw­ing money at a prob­lem doesn’t solve it. And when look­ing at loc­al elec­tions, it can of­ten make it worse.

Don’t Spend, In­vest. Sen. Kirsten Gilibrand, D-N.Y., is an ex­ample of a pro­gress­ive who has used her fun­drais­ing prowess to do more than just dole out money. She has act­ively worked to identi­fy, re­cruit, and sup­port new fe­male can­did­ates, such as young power­house Rep. Tulsi Gab­bard, D-Hawaii. Not long after Gab­bard’s elec­tion, she, in turn, foun­ded the Fu­ture Caucus, a group fo­cused on de­vel­op­ing long-term solu­tions to is­sues that face Amer­ica’s next gen­er­a­tion.

Just like in any pro­fes­sion, people in polit­ics climb the lad­der. This usu­ally hap­pens when a polit­ic­al party re­cruits a lower-level of­fice­hold­er to run for high­er of­fice. If you fol­low that lad­der down, from Con­gress to statewide elec­ted po­s­i­tions and from there to state­house and city-coun­cil seats, you reach the point of entry for new can­did­ates. By re­cruit­ing, train­ing, and sup­port­ing young pro­gress­ive can­did­ates run­ning for their first state or loc­al of­fice, we can change our coun­try.

That’s what Launch­Pro­gress PAC is try­ing to do in Michigan. Right now, just 20 per­cent of state le­gis­lat­ors are wo­men. To change that, we en­dorsed Stephanie Chang, Kristy Pa­gan, and Re­becca Thompson, three in­cred­ible young wo­men run­ning in the De­troit area. Elect­ing them would not only bring more wo­men in­to state of­fice, it would also nearly double the num­ber of wo­men of col­or in the Le­gis­lature. If elec­ted, Chang would be the first Asi­an-Amer­ic­an wo­man to serve in the Le­gis­lature. And Jon Hoad­ley, an­oth­er can­did­ate we en­dorsed, would be­come the only LGBT law­maker in the state­house.

Back­ing the right people early and bring­ing new voices from un­der­rep­res­en­ted back­grounds in­to elec­tions will cre­ate pro­gress­ive cham­pi­ons and strong pub­lic ser­vants.

The Launch­Pro­gress vis­ion is one where we find great people first, of­fer them the sup­port they need and his­tor­ic­ally have been denied, and then in­vest in their abil­ity to serve the pub­lic by pur­su­ing elec­ted of­fice. It’s a vis­ion where Chelsea Clin­ton’s friends, maybe even Chelsea her­self, and oth­er young wo­men across the coun­try see elec­ted of­fice as a real op­por­tun­ity to change and im­prove lives.

This is a tough mod­el to ex­pand, but if we are ser­i­ous about rep­res­ent­at­ive demo­cracy, it is the mod­el that will best em­power and en­able Amer­ica’s would-be pub­lic ser­vants.

Luke Squire is the cofounder and co­dir­ect­or of Launch­Pro­gress, a group work­ing to re­cruit, train, and sup­port young pro­gress­ive can­did­ates run­ning for their first state or loc­al of­fice.


The Next Amer­ica wel­comes op-ed pieces that ex­plore the polit­ic­al, eco­nom­ic, and so­cial ef­fects of the pro­found ra­cial and cul­tur­al changes fa­cing our na­tion, par­tic­u­larly rel­ev­ant to edu­ca­tion, eco­nomy, the work­force, and health. Email Jan­ell Ross at jross@na­tion­al­journ­al.com. Please fol­low us on Twit­ter and Face­book.

What We're Following See More »
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.