Working Mother, Washington Powerhouse? Good Luck.

Family-work balance is far from the only challenge powerful women face in this town.

Neera Tanden
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Neera Tanden
July 25, 2014, 1 a.m.

In late 2006, my old boss Hil­lary Clin­ton star­ted talk­ing to me about the ideas that would fuel her pres­id­en­tial cam­paign. I had ad­vised Hil­lary on policy when she was first lady, Sen­ate can­did­ate, and sen­at­or, so it seemed nat­ur­al that I’d be part of her pres­id­en­tial run. Nat­ur­al to every­one but me, that is. At the time I had two young chil­dren, ages 1 and 4; ad­vising a pres­id­en­tial cam­paign while caring for them seemed a gar­gan­tu­an task.

Neera Tanden is the pres­id­ent of the Cen­ter for Amer­ic­an Pro­gress. (Ral­ph Alswang)I ached over the de­cision but ul­ti­mately said yes. Un­like most wo­men, I was for­tu­nate in two cru­cial ways: I had a hus­band who was truly a co-par­ent, and I had a boss who would give me the flex­ib­il­ity to do my work while still up­hold­ing my re­spons­ib­il­it­ies as a mom. One mem­or­able day, Hil­lary even flipped her sched­ule to en­sure that I could at­tend my daugh­ter’s pre-K gradu­ation and still run her de­bate prep. She nev­er gave me less work or re­spons­ib­il­ity—be­lieve me!—just the abil­ity to do it on a sched­ule that let me get home for din­ner (but not cook it) most nights and al­lowed me to work through the wee hours of the morn­ing at home. I didn’t get much sleep, but it worked.

Today I’m one of just a hand­ful of wo­men run­ning ma­jor Wash­ing­ton in­sti­tu­tions. But I’m fully aware that I would not be head­ing the Cen­ter for Amer­ic­an Pro­gress, as a moth­er of two, without be­ing so lucky in my hus­band and former boss. I had the chance to step up in my ca­reer when my kids were young, not step back. That’s im­possible for most wo­men in the U.S.

Be­cause work­ing wo­men still shoulder the li­on’s share of care­giv­ing at home, in­ad­equate pub­lic policies mean that far too many pro­fes­sion­al wo­men leave the work­force dur­ing the prime of their ca­reers to bond with a new baby or care for a sick par­ent. When they re­turn to work, they are forever be­hind their peers, both in the lead­er­ship pack and in earn­ing po­ten­tial.

The mores of high-pres­sure jobs in Wash­ing­ton—which em­phas­ize long hours and put a premi­um on face time with the high­er-ups—con­vince a lot of wo­men that they can’t suc­ceed at the highest level and be good moms. But mores are a func­tion of cul­ture, and we can shape the cul­ture. That’s why, at CAP, we ex­pect ex­cel­lent work, but if a par­ent has to leave the of­fice to take a child to the doc­tor, nobody sweats it.

Of course, fam­ily/work bal­ance is far from the only chal­lenge power­ful wo­men face in this town. And if you’re a wo­man of col­or, well, watch out. I vividly re­mem­ber one meet­ing with busi­ness lead­ers and aca­dem­ics early in Hil­lary’s pres­id­en­tial cam­paign; at the time I was in my late 30s and rising through the ranks. I had called the meet­ing, and was do­ing most of the talk­ing. But many of the men around the table aimed their ques­tions right past me, to my white, male deputy. I could also see them look­ing to him for con­firm­a­tion of what I was say­ing.

At first I thought it was be­cause I was young. But then I real­ized my deputy looked half my age. Did they not see me as a lead­er be­cause I was a wo­man? Be­cause I was In­di­an? Be­cause I was short? Be­cause I was all three? I will nev­er know. But I do know they didn’t, or couldn’t, see me as an au­thor­ity fig­ure.

What holds back wo­men in Wash­ing­ton is not so much that they lack the pro­ver­bi­al “seat at the table”; after all, I wasn’t just sit­ting at the table in that meet­ing, it was my table. It’s not how they ne­go­ti­ate their salar­ies, either, or when they choose to have chil­dren, or wheth­er they “lean in” enough; Wash­ing­ton has no short­age of bril­liant, as­sert­ive young wo­men. They are held back by a cul­ture that of­ten mar­gin­al­izes their voices, by a so­ci­ety that un­der­val­ues their work, and by pub­lic policy that fails to sup­port and em­power them. You shouldn’t have to win the boss lot­tery, or the hus­band lot­tery, to be able to thrive pro­fes­sion­ally while rais­ing your chil­dren. But that’s still the real­ity for too many.

Neera Tanden is the pres­id­ent of the Cen­ter for Amer­ic­an Pro­gress.

What We're Following See More »
NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
COMMISSIONERS NEED TO DELIBERATE MORE
FCC Pushes Vote on Set-Top Boxes
2 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Federal regulators on Thursday delayed a vote on a proposal to reshape the television market by freeing consumers from cable box rentals, putting into doubt a plan that has pitted technology companies against cable television providers. ... The proposal will still be considered for a future vote. But Tom Wheeler, chairman of the F.C.C., said commissioners needed more discussions."

Source:
UNTIL DEC. 9, ANYWAY
Obama Signs Bill to Fund Government
7 hours ago
THE LATEST
REDSKINS IMPLICATIONS
SCOTUS to Hear Case on Offensive Trademarks
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

"The Supreme Court is taking up a First Amendment clash over the government’s refusal to register offensive trademarks, a case that could affect the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. The justices agreed Thursday to hear a dispute involving an Asian-American rock band called the Slants, but they did not act on a separate request to hear the higher-profile Redskins case at the same time." Still, any precedent set by the case could have ramifications for the Washington football team.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Bannon Still Collecting Royalties from ‘Seinfeld’
9 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The Hollywood Reporter takes a look at a little-known intersection of politics and entertainment, in which Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon is still raking in residuals from Seinfeld. Here's the digest version: When Seinfeld was in its infancy, Ted Turner was in the process of acquiring its production company, Castle Rock, but he was under-capitalized. Bannon's fledgling media company put up the remaining funds, and he agreed to "participation rights" instead of a fee. "Seinfeld has reaped more than $3 billion in its post-network afterlife through syndication deals." Meanwhile, Bannon is "still cashing checks from Seinfeld, and observers say he has made nearly 25 times more off the Castle Rock deal than he had anticipated."

Source:
×