Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Everything’s bigger in Texas, including the negative impact of runoffs on women candidates

Opinion

Jessica Cisneros - Texas primary runoff

Jessica Cisneros advanced to a primary runoff in the race for a U.S. House seat representing Texas.

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Usalis is a strategic partnerships manager for RepresentWomen.

Last month, Texas kicked off the midterm season with another batch of high-profile races going into a runoff — 23, to be exact.

Texas election law states that primary candidates must win with a majority, which becomes tricky when there are more than two candidates running. This results in an extraordinary amount of elections being forced into a runoff, where the top two candidates compete head-to-head in a second round of primary elections.

What’s so wrong with this? Two words: time and money. Both of which women candidates generally have less of.


Gender Parity Index: TexasRepresentWomen

Money Cost

A March 3 article in The Fulcrum explained, “A 2021 analysis of election spending in Texas, conducted by FairVote and Third Way, estimated that each county had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to conduct the runoff, at least $6 million in total.” That is an additional $6 million beyond what is already being spent on elections. Every. Single. Year.

We also know that campaigning is expensive, especially for women candidates. RepresentWomen’s 2020 PAC Report found that individual donors are less likely to be women, that Republican women are the most underfunded candidates, and it simply takes more money to win as a woman. The report goes on to say, “women are underfunded by PACs and in turn are reliant on smaller donations from a larger network of donors (i.e.’grassroots fundraising’). Grassroots fundraising requires more time to raise the same amount of money putting women at a strategic disadvantage.”

Time Cost

The time cost of dragging out an election season is a serious burden for candidates, especially women. Our current culture dictates that women take on the majority of unpaid work at home, which means women who enter the workforce carry a dual burden that leaves them in major time poverty. The Pew Research Center found that working mothers in the United States spent an average of 25 hours per week on housework and chil dcare, compared to working fathers' 16 hours. And that’s on top of their full-time jobs. Imagine hearing that your race has gone into a runoff and you have to start all over again!

A twin-track solution

These systemic issues cause big problems for everyone involved, and these problems have a bigger impact on women. The situation for Republican women and women of color is even worse. To address challenges that are this multifaceted and deeply embedded, we need a twin-track approach.

Twin track solutionRepresentWomen

Empowerment track: Powerful factors like cultural beliefs about gender roles, “viability,” and who is traditionally seen as worth investing in all keep women from running and winning in U.S. politics. Because of the world we live in, women need a community to encourage, educate and empower them to participate in politics. They need a community to invest and believe in them, and often to help them address any self-stigma that has been absorbed from the world around them. This track is critical, but it’s not enough on its own.

Systems track. Electoral policies, gatekeeper norms, antiquated governance practices and other systemic barriers restrict the pace of change, no matter how many women run for office. So while organizations and groups are doing the work of investing in and empowering women to run, win, serve and lead, we need to also invest in systems change that removes the built-in barriers that keep women out.

Solutions like ranked-choice voting (also known as instant runoff) kill several birds with one stone by eliminating vote splitting and spoilers, incentivizing positive campaigning, rewarding issue-focused campaigns, and making elections more affordable. Since candidates in RCV elections always win with a true majority, RCV also eliminates the need for these costly runoff elections that are hard for everyone, but even harder on women candidates.

Why #RepresentationMatters

Representation is not just about fairness. It’s about better policy processes and outcomes. The United States is wading through a sea of challenges right now, and we need the best and the brightest at the table to successfully navigate these rough waters. Cutting women out of the equation severely limits that candidate pool and hamstrings our efforts to solve these pressing issues. To overcome powerful systemic barriers we need powerful systemic solutions.

Read More

White Books and Curriculum Damage Black Children

The rise of book bans and erasure of Black history from classrooms emotionally and systematically harms Black children. It's critical that we urge educators to represent Black experiences and stories in class.

Getty Images, Klaus Vedfelt

White Books and Curriculum Damage Black Children

When my son, Jonathan, was born, one of the first children’s books I bought was "So Much" by Trish Cooke. I was captivated by its joyful depiction of a Black family loving their baby boy. I read it to him often, wanting him to know that he was deeply loved, seen, and valued. In an era when politicians are banning books, sanitizing curricula, and policing the teaching of Black history, the idea of affirming Black children’s identities is miscast as divisive and wrong. Forty-two states have proposed or passed legislation restricting how race and history can be taught, including Black history. PEN America reported that nearly 16,000 books (many featuring Black stories) were banned from schools within the last three years across 43 states. These prohibitive policies and bans are presented as protecting the ‘feelings’ of White children, while at the same time ignoring and invalidating the feelings of Black children who live daily with the pain of erasure, distortion, and disregard in schools.

When I hear and see the ongoing devaluation of Black children in schools and public life, I, and other Black parents, recognize this pain firsthand. For instance, recently, my teenage granddaughter, Jaliyah, texted me, asking to visit the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C., because she had heard that the President planned to close it. For what felt like the millionth time, my heart broke with the understanding that too many people fail to rally on behalf of Black children. Jaliyah’s question revealed what so many Black children intuitively understand—that their histories, their feelings, and their futures are often treated as expendable.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pluralism or DEI - or Both - or None?

equity, inclusion, diversity

AI generated

Pluralism or DEI - or Both - or None?

Even before Trump’s actions against DEI, many in the academic community and elsewhere felt for some time that DEI had taken an unintended turn.

What was meant to provide support—in jobs, education, grants, and other ways—to those groups who historically and currently have suffered from discrimination became for others a sign of exclusion because all attention was placed on how these groups were faring, with little attention to others. Those left out were assumed not to need any help, but that was mistaken. They did need help and are angry.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two people in business attire walking into an office.

Dr. Valentina Greco reflects on how accent bias, internalized gatekeeping, and hidden prejudices shape academia—and how true change begins by confronting our own discomfort.

Getty Images, Marco VDM

How Do We Become the Gatekeepers?

“Do you have a moment?”

I turned and saw my senior colleague, Paul (not his real name), a mentor and sponsor, at my office door.

Keep ReadingShow less
So DEI doesn’t work. OK, what would be better?

Conceptual image of multiple human face shapes in a variety of colors illustrating different races

Getty Images

So DEI doesn’t work. OK, what would be better?

It is no secret that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs are under attack in our country. They have been blamed for undermining free speech, meritocracy, and America itself. The University of Virginia is the latest to settle with the government and walk away from its DEI initiatives rather than defend its programs or find a new solution.

Those who decry DEI say they do so in the name of meritocracy. They argue that those who benefit from DEI programs do so at the expense of other, more qualified individuals, and that these programs are weakening professions such as our military, science, education, and healthcare. But these arguments have it exactly backwards. DEI programs were never designed to give privilege to underrepresented people. They were put in place to chip away at discrimination and nepotism, both concepts that are antithetical to meritocracy.

Keep ReadingShow less