« The Special Counsel’s Decision Not To Prosecute Donald Trump Jr. | Main | Third Annual Law and STEM Junior Scholars' Conference »

Monday, April 29, 2019

Electing women

A question asked over dinner: Why are so many nations ahead of the United States in electing women to the highest national office?

A possible answer: The influence of a nation's political system. Many (most?) of the women in these countries have been elected as prime minister (or its equivalent), the head of government who is not also the  head of state. So they are not elected nationally, at least not as a formal matter; they are elected in legislative districts and assume national office by virtue of leadership in a political party that attains a legislative majority (or leads a legislative coalition). This seems true of many of the European and Commonwealth countries that most Americans think of as having elected high-profile women leaders, although there are counter-examples in South American and Asia.

Note that the United States has elected a woman in this manner--Nancy Pelosi. But the U.S. political system does not give her the same power that Germany or Norway or New Zealand does.

Posted by Howard Wasserman on April 29, 2019 at 08:00 PM in Howard Wasserman, Law and Politics | Permalink

Comments

Nice post! Nice post! I have to say that the future is in the hands of women!! By the manner, most of the elected leader, who was particularly represented by the females, would naturally lead.

Posted by: Belkin Error Code 10 | Jul 2, 2019 3:45:04 AM

Just to better emphasize it:

America is blessed as a great Nation ( economically and militarily ). If blessed by " god bless America " then:

You can't turn against god who does bless it. Favoring: abortions, homosexuals, and women beyond their inherent natural and narrow duty ( working at the kitchen, and delivering kids ) would result naturally, in defying god and his natural order dictated to the Nation.

Thanks

Posted by: El roam | Apr 30, 2019 5:06:33 AM

Interesting issue or question, correct per se but not really The main reasons:

First, the President is the Commander in Chief of the Army.The US, is built on the ethos of greatness. Among others, greatness as global Super power. As such, less chances so far ( emphasizing : so far, but too complicated right now ) for women to become presidents.

Also, very unique composite or mixture of " freedom " ( constitutionally and effectively ) on one hand, on the other, conservative society. So, there is less chance for breakthrough paradoxically, because the society from its early foundation, is truly based on values of freedom. Typically, a breakthrough, is a target, resulting in sudden emergence of oppressed groups ( like minorities, and women ). But here, we deal with strong sens of freedom, yet, still conservative as the society is, and that sense of conservatism in fact, yielded actually the freedom it feels:

God bless America..... ( think of the paradox it bears ). So, if it is not broken, why to fix it ??

Thanks

Posted by: El roam | Apr 30, 2019 4:54:22 AM

Even within the legislative branch, there are fewer women in Congress than in parliamentary bodies. In America, the voters from a given state or congressional district get to choose who will be their party's nominee. Countries like Canada, France and UK leave much of the decision as to who will run in a given seat to the national party. Much easier to get a desirable mix of women and visible minorities running that way.

Posted by: PaulB | Apr 29, 2019 10:58:45 PM

Post a comment