The Women Gloria Steinem Forgot

As much respect as I have for Gloria Steinem, in her recent op-ed piece, she took her eye off the ball. In fact, there were three groups of American women who I wished to have seen in her op-ed piece who were invisible.

1: Women in Iraq

Hillary Clinton voted to send many of America’s military daughters to Iraq in 2002 and 2003. In fact, Hillary cited her experience as part of the reason for that vote. Hillary said that she was misled by President Bush of all people and she did not read the NIE report before her vote. The President and Congress’s decision, including Hillary’s vote, led to Americans sending our military daughters into a country that had nothing to do with September 11. While Hillary Clinton said there were weapons of mass destruction, there were not.

Barack Obama though knew from the start that there was not a case to merit sending America’s daughters to Iraq. Obama stood up early and he said, “I don’t oppose all wars. I just oppose dumb wars.” Not only did he oppose the war, he accurately predicted it’s consequences in ways Hillary did not.

The cost of Hillary’s, the Congress’s, and the President’s decision has led to the deaths of 3800+ American soldiers, including women. Thousands of American soldiers have committed suicide upon returning to the United States, including women. One to two trillion dollars in taxpayer money has been pushed into a war of choice. Al Qaeda has strengthened rather than weakened. Bin Laden is still running around in Pakistan/Afghanistan, plotting another attack to destroy lives in the U.S., including women’s.

Which candidate’s record was speaking for America’s military daughters in Iraq? Which candidate’s judgment was speaking for the children of the American soldiers who will for years to come have to deal with parents who have been traumatized by the experience of an unnecessary war? Who’s position was speaking for the disproportionately rural, minority, and working-class mothers whose children were put in harm’s way on the wrong battlefield?

2: Women Who Lack Healthcare Because of Lobbyist Influence.

Hillary Clinton has long been an advocate for women and children. In fact, Hillary has helped with developing a program to provide health insurance to children and to provide health care for members of the national guard. Hillary Clinton was also at the center of an effort to provide universal health care to Americans that ultimately failed.

Barack Obama has an equally strong, (and in some respects stronger, if you count healthcare legislation passed) track record on health care as well. Obama has worked with Republicans and Democrats to pass legislation that expanded health care to over 100,000 people in his state. He has been at the forefront on issues of domestic violence, educating people in his state about post-partum depression, and setting up health care centers in areas that were underserved. He worked closely with women on the streets of Chicago to help their teenage children and get asbestos out of their apartments.

Despite their impressive healthcare records though steep problems remain for Americans on the issue of healthcare and many understand that much of it is because of the large influence of lobbyists in American politics.

To this end, Barack Obama has taken a much stronger stand to rid himself of the strings of lobbyist funding in ways that Hillary hasn’t. Hillary is one of the top recipients of funding from the health industry and is one of the major users of earmarks and pork spending. Hillary is also the only major Democratic candidate taking money from federally registered lobbyists. In fact, Hillary recently said she would not give up federal lobbyist funding because she believed, “lobbyists represent real Americans.” Furthermore, she also has been less transparent in revealing her campaign and personal finances to the American people than Barack Obama. What is more, while Hillary has just talked about reducing lobbyist influence, Barack Obama has already acted on this. He passed some of the most important ethics reform legislation in the state of Illinois and in the U.S. Senate.

Which candidate’s record is best speaking for the women of America who want to break the stranglehold of lobbyists on our politics so that we can get healthcare passed?

3: Women Who Are the Victims of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing

Over the past two or three decades, there has been nearly a 600% increase in the number of American women jailed because of the unequal mandatory minimum sentencing drug laws.

Recently though Hillary Clinton attacked Barack Obama for his views that judges should have discretion on the sentencing for those cases. The Clinton campaign promoted Obama’s position to the press as “too liberal.”

Furthermore, Senator Clinton was the only one of the Democratic nominees who opposed retroactivity for mandatory minimum sentencing. As Jack and Jill Politics notes, this position even “put her to the right of Antonin Scalia.”

Ms. Steinem, weren’t you the least bit upset for those women sitting behind bars that a major Democratic candidate would take those positions? Which candidate’s position is speaking for them?

The Consequences of Policy Positions for Any Marginalized Groups

Now I have no problem calling out people for gender bias as I did when people misread Hillary’s impassioned response to Edwards at the debate this past weekend. Yet for all the aforementioned reasons, I believe Gloria Steinem took her eye off the ball.

Given the nexus of race and gender that she herself acknowledges must be uprooted together, I would have hoped that she would resist choosing a “who is more oppressed than whom” route and instead judge the candidates on the consequences of their policy positions for any Americans whose voices are marginalized.

The deep truth is that until marginalization is tackled in an all-encompassing way that acknowledges the multi-dimensionality of marginalization across race, gender, class, sexuality, etc., rather than a singular-identity “women are the most oppressed” way as Steinem’s article does, women won’t truly be free.

I’ll let the unacknowledged voices of the women I highlight above testify to that.