American Maggie

President Obama delivered “Hope” to our country during his election campaign. He promised to reform the commonly controversial actions of our government, and deliver a new form of leadership founded on the basis of change.

There appears to be a discrepancy between President Obama’s intentions and his actions. During his crusade for the White House, Obama insisted on terminating the practice of pork-barrel allocations. Yet, the recent allotment of $2.6 billion away from American troops in Afghanistan proves differently.

Last week senators packed 778 earmarks into the 2010 Defense Appropriations. These earmarks included $25 million for a World War II museum in Louisiana and $20 for an educational institute in honor of the late Massachusetts Democrat, Senator Edward Kennedy. Funding these two projects is not the concern. The concern lies in the source of such allocations. Money which was intended for troop support in Afghanistan is now being diverted towards U.S. projects which bear no relation to the war, thus leaving our troops with the short end of the deal.

While earmarks are not novel, Congress’ latest allocations have sparked debate from both sides of the political spectrum. In a recent article from The Washington Times, former Senate staffer Winslow Wheeler accused Congress of “mangling the defense budget” more than ever experienced in the past 30 years. Wheeler has worked on defense funding for both political parties. According to Wheeler the money used for these “pet” projects was taken from money intended for projects related to operations and maintenance. This money was expected to support troop training, field repairs, fuel, and other supplies necessary for combat. While Senate officials continue to maintain the claim that these monetary cuts do not deplete troop funding, such a claim bears little legitimacy.

According to Mr. Wheeler, Navy and Air Force combat pilots currently receive half the training hours that pilots received at the end of the Vietnam War. Allegedly, the Navy has curbed at-sea training and flying due to the decrease in Operations and Management funds this past year. In sum, crews are being sent to the front lines without even a satisfactory amount of training hours.

Yet some Senators continue to argue that redirecting support towards erecting a museum or establishing the Edward M. Kennedy Institute is as imperative as funding our troops overseas. A spokesman for John Kerry seems to feel that we must honor the late Senator Kennedy by erecting an institute in his honor, because of his commitment to the armed Services Committee for 27 years. But wouldn’t it be more honorable to continue protection and support for the men and women who continue to serve our nation as Kennedy once did? We need to sustain the troops’ legacy in Afghanistan rather than averting attention away from their service.

Although there is still a chance that lawmakers could restore troop funding, the likelihood of such intentions proves dim. This issue should not rest on the basis of could. As we have seen with President Obama, intentions are admirable, but actions are what truly matter. This nation may be founded on intentions, but it is built on actions.

******

Kathleen Someah previously attended Kenyon College where she studied English and Political Science.  She is currently an intern with a political think tank where she focuses primarily on issues relating to homeland security.

On a chilly November day in 1872, a dark-haired woman, her coat buttoned against the cold, entered a news depot in Rochester, NY.  She purchased nothing, but marked a piece of paper, folded it, and handed it over to a gentleman stationed beside a wooden box.  Her name was Susan B. Anthony, and she had just cast the first woman’s vote in a presidential election.  She voted the straight Republican ticket.  Last week a far less momentous first occurred, but it was also significant for Republican women.  The Republican National Committee launched its enhanced website, the first to be fully integrated with blogs, Facebook, and Twitter.  But in the thicket of sophisticated images and sparkling technologies were few mentions of Anthony, and barely a nod to the development of female freedom in America.  At GOP.com, readers will have to dig deep to learn that the GOP was the first party to recognize women in its platform, support suffrage, and elect the first female U.S. Representative – all before the 19th Amendment passed.  Under the “Republican Accomplishments” section there are no female congresswomen, senators, governors, Supreme Court justices, or vice presidential candidates.  The year 1872 is highlighted for the founding of Yellowstone National Park.  The 19th Amendment?  It’s there, lauding Senator Aaron Sergeant for drafting the original language, with not a single suffragette in sight.  Elsewhere online, but nowhere directly linked to by GOP.com, is sister site RNC Women, motto, “You Asked and We Listened.”  While having a special page for women isn’t a bad idea, using it as the sole vehicle of party outreach to women is.  RNCW is not an issues site, but a bare bones Ning social networking page for the already Republican faithful; with under 650 members, it doesn’t even seem to be reaching them.  Part of the problem may be lack of advertising:  GOP.com does not currently mention the website, and the average citizen googling “GOP women” or “Republican women” won’t even find it on the first page of results.  The official message seems to be that separate but equal is the way to go.

Until the mid-1900s, any woman in a voting booth was likely punching Republican chads.  The GOP was popular with female voters, for the simple and obvious reason that it was the only party to support them.  The Democrats stone walled, ignored, and side-lined women for decades, and while the Republicans first introduced the 19th Amendment in Congress in 1878, the bill stalled until nearly 50 years later when pro-suffrage Republicans controlled both House and Senate.  But gradually, Republicans have forgotten their identity as leaders in equality and taken to wandering the fraught landscape of gender politics like amnesia victims without wallets.  Democrats have seized the opportunity to redefine the issues, mask their chauvinism, and become the party that speaks for “Women” – an invented, Borg-like gender that thinks, acts, and votes as one.

The Star Trek approach has proved a successful strategy.  The party of Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, and Susan B. Anthony is now the party that many Americans perceive as intolerant, bigoted, and uncaring.  When it comes to claiming women and their concerns, Democrats push and bully, and Republicans wind up standing in the corner of the schoolyard with a pair of broken glasses and no lunch money.  Today women are more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans, and to feel more included and welcomed by the Left than the Right.  This is no small issue; the failure to woo women is stifling the future of the GOP.  Women comprise nearly 51 percent of the U.S. population and encompass every race, age, and socio-economic group.  They are the most persistent voters, turning out in larger numbers than men in every presidential election since 1980.  In short:  they are the most influential cross-section of the American population, and the most likely to decide our Nation’s future.  Win the hearts of women, win the next election.  But so far the Right is proving a clumsy suitor.  While Democrats relentlessly pursue female leadership, throwing their money and resources behind female candidates, Republicans just flirt every four years, hoping to get a vote.  And it shows.  Of the 246 total women elected to the House and Senate in U.S. history, approximately a third were Republican.  Of the 32 female governors elected so far in the United States, only 12 were Republican.  As the numbers tell it, the “Grand Old Party” isn’t so grand for women.

But the bad beaus of the Right may be changing.  A new vanguard of female leadership is emerging, from corporate power suits Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina to hip politicos like Megan McCain and Liz Cheney.  Organizations such as Project GOPink, the Susan B. Anthony List, Smart Girl Politics, and this magazine are striving to provide encouragement and a voice for conservative women.  And they have a solid base to build on thanks to President George W. Bush.  In the past eight years, he far outpaced his own party, and all previous administrations, by appointing more women to his cabinet than any other president (four of which were female firsts).  Under Bush, women commanded nontraditional roles that required smarts and toughness:  think Condoleezza Rice, first female National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State, Dana Perino, Press Secretary and voice of the White House, or Fran Townsend, currently the only female Homeland Security Advisor.  As for women’s issues, Republicans have an excellent (and under-publicized) record, fighting the brutal oppression of women in Afghanistan and other countries, funding breast cancer research, broadcasting the risk of female heart disease, and aggressively prosecuting human traffickers.  Finally, let’s not forget the 2008 election.  Sarah Palin’s candidacy for vice president proved that the GOP can welcome a female leader.  But it also demonstrated how very far the Right has to go in understanding the unique challenges and biases women face as candidates.  While the liberal media pummeled Palin with every chauvinist weapon in the arsenal (from “she’s a bad mom” to “she’s too pretty”), many women viewed Palin’s dark horse moment as an attempt to buy their votes, further confirming that the GOP had made little effort at an invested relationship with women.

Can today’s GOP earn the female vote it labored so long to allow?  Rip Van Winkle Republicans must do much more than awaken every four years, realize that women vote, and run door to door through the village seeking support.  A party whose official website lists Clara Barton as a “Republican Hero” for stumping for male candidates, but doesn’t feature Elizabeth Dole, Vesta Roy, or Michelle Bachmann won’t get a check mark on the next ballet.  Women will have to become more than a side-site and their contributions an afterthought; they need to be a central part of the Party’s decision making.  To regain trust, the GOP will have to work hard and take risks, just as it did more than a century ago.  Success will require encouraging and equipping female candidates, reaching out to female voters, and perhaps most of all, sharing the incredible story of Republican women’s accomplishments.  For years, Democrats have accused Republicans of being traditional and old-fashioned.  With a remarkable history like ours, it’s time we proved them right.

******

Skyla Freeman is a former writer for President George W. Bush.  She blogs about style and culture at Sanity Fair online (sfair.blogspot.com).