Parties Vying to Be a Woman’s Best Friend

The American woman, in the eyes of Congress at least, is in distress. Whether young or old, married or single, parent or childless, a salaried employee or a work-at-home mom, she needs help from Uncle Sam. And Democrats and Republicans alike are rushing to provide it.

With proposals ranging from a higher minimum wage to billions more for child care, from pension reform to protections for “innocent spouses” from the tax collector, politicians of every stripe are vying to become a woman’s best friend as congressional elections approach.

But this outpouring of chivalry by the overwhelmingly male Congress is quickly turning into a nasty, partisan brawl, prompting one moderate GOP senator to inveigh against indulging in “mommy wars.”

Much of what is on Congress’ agenda, such as reforming public education and preserving Social Security and Medicare, is not overtly gender-specific. But it directly addresses concerns more often voiced by women than men.

“It’s the name of the game,” said GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio.

For Republicans to win, they will have to play catch-up. The “gender gap” reached new proportions in 1996, when President Clinton outpolled Republican challenger Bob Dole by 16 percentage points among women--even as men divided 44% for Dole and 43% for Clinton.

“What you have now is, the Democrats feel that the female vote is what they need in order to win, and so they are protecting her,” Fabrizio said. “The Republicans are recognizing that females have by and large slipped out of their reach, at least on the federal level, and they are trying to gain her.”

Analysts and pollsters say the recent personal allegations against Clinton have caused no erosion in the gender gap. “Women have stuck with him much more than men--even accentuating the gap,” said Norman Ornstein, a political analyst at the American Enterprise Institute.

For all the focus on women, however, many of the issues being debated “have always been out there,” said Anita Perez Ferguson, head of the National Women’s Political Caucus. “They are simply being presented now with a bit of a slant.”

Rep. Jennifer Dunn of Washington, head of the House GOP effort to “bridge the gender gap,” has been actively promoting the message that her party cares about women and their concerns.

On her Internet Web page, Dunn trumpets the 1997 tax cuts as a boon not only for the public at large, but for women in particular. She also touts the Republican plan to cut the estate tax as disproportionately benefiting women because they tend to outlive men.

GOP strategists, such as Fabrizio, warn, however, against an exclusively pocketbook appeal, noting that issues like education, health care and safe neighborhoods tend to resonate more with women than do economic issues.

“Folks are getting much more sophisticated in targeting women,” said Patricia Ireland, head of the National Organization for Women. And the political interest in women, she added, has “dramatically increased.”

Among the bills designed to appeal to women:

* Legislation offered by Dunn to allow women to make “catch-up contributions” to their private retirement plans upon returning to the work force after maternity leave. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) has introduced such a bill in the Senate.

* A GOP measure to abolish the so-called marriage penalty, which makes a couple’s taxes higher than those of two people with the same income living together but filing separately. Rep. David M. McIntosh (R-Ind.) described the bill as the “working women’s tax relief bill of 1998.”

* A bill by Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) to ensure that breast-feeding in the workplace is a protected activity under civil rights laws. It would also provide a tax credit to businesses that provide “a safe, private and sanitary location where a woman can use lactation equipment or breast-feed her child.”

Separately, Rep. Jon Christensen (R-Neb.) is leading a fight against a Clinton proposal to tax those who transfer their annuity investments from one account to another. Christensen pointedly noted: “55% of annuity owners are women.”

And both parties and Clinton have vowed to crack down further on deadbeat parents, who are mostly fathers.

Three recent developments on Capitol Hill further illuminate the stampede to enact pro-female legislation--while exposing the deep philosophical differences between the two parties.

At a Feb. 12 Democratic Party unity rally, all three testimonials about the good economic times were delivered by women from private life. After the president endorsed an increase in the minimum wage at that same event, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) noted that 60% of the potential beneficiaries are women. “The minimum wage is about women,” he said.

A day earlier, at a Senate Finance Committee hearing on reforming the Internal Revenue Service, the leadoff panel consisted of four women who had been zealously pursued by the IRS because their ex-husbands owed back taxes. Current laws hold spouses responsible for the entire tax liability, but the GOP wants greater protection for “innocent spouses.”

At about the same time as the IRS hearing, the GOP-dominated House debated a resolution stating that government child-care initiatives must not discriminate against stay-at-home parents.

In his budget, Clinton proposed tax credits for businesses that provide child care for employees and tax deductions for child care for working families. The five-year initiative has a $21.7-billion price tag.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) responded by calling “first and foremost” for tax cuts as the way to enable more families to keep one parent at home with a family’s children.

The House vote on the child-care resolution was unanimous: 409 to 0, with three Democrats voting present. But it belied the heated debate that preceded it.

Led by Rep. William F. Goodling of Pennsylvania, chairman of the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities, Republicans chastised Clinton for ignoring the family with a stay-at-home parent.

“Washington must not discriminate against the 50% of parents who sacrifice a second income so one parent can stay home to raise their children,” said Rep. Dave Weldon (R-Fla.).

Democrats argued that Clinton’s proposals would assist families that do not have the luxury of keeping one parent at home. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas derided the GOP measure as “a true do-nothing resolution [that] seeks to create a false dichotomy between families . . . and to pit one group against another.”

But Dunn said it was Clinton who had done just that. “His plan creates a bias against mothers who have sacrificed an income to raise their children at home,” she said. “Instead, we should make it possible for as many children as possible to enjoy the benefit of full-time parental care during their early years.”

Underlying the debate, Ornstein said, is an ideological battle over the role of the family. Conservatives, he said, “want to encourage traditional families, with mothers that stay at home. And they rebel against government policies tilted toward families that work.”

Sen. John H. Chafee (R-R.I.), who advised against waging “mommy wars,” is drafting a plan to provide tax credits for stay-at-home parents and government-subsidized day care.

For Republicans, focusing on specific legislation is all well and good, pollster Fabrizio said. “But the truth is, symbolism, language, demeanor and basic understanding of the drastic changes that have happened in women’s lives have a lot more to do with it than any specific legislation.”

Thus the GOP’s opposition to the minimum wage and desire to limit abortion rights could undermine its ability to court women.

“Republicans still have a difficult time with the far right of their party,” said Ferguson of the National Women’s Political Caucus. “So they don’t come out as particularly friendly to women.”