This analysis demonstrates how political ambition theory can be applied to women who have served in the U.S. House of Representatives: under what conditions do political women manifest discrete, static, and progressive ambition? Our database includes all women elected to the House between 1916 and 2000. In differentiating between discrete and static ambition, we find that among congressional widows, there are measurable differences between those who seek reelection and those that step down, with independent political experience and working partnerships in their husband’s political careers being especially important. In addition, we show that women in the House are strategic when deciding whether to run for the Senate. Progressive ambition—the decision to run for higher office—flows from a calculus that incorporates the probability of winning, the value of the office, and the costs of running. As such, it appears that the women of the House respond to the same strategic forces as their male counterparts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, John H.1995. Why Parties?Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
Amundson, Kirsten. 1971. The Silenced Majority: Women and American Democracy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3.
Barber, James David. 1965. The Lawmakers. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
4.
Barone, Michael, Grant Ujifusa, and Douglas Matthews. 1972. The Almanac of American Politics, 1972. New York: Dutton.
5.
Bernstein, Robert. 1986. “Why are There so few Women in the House?”Western Political Quarterly39: 155-164.
6.
Biographical Directory of the American Congress, 1774-1996. 1997. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
7.
Bullock, Charles, and Patricia Lee Findley Heys. 1972. “Recruitment of Women for Congress: A Research Note.”Western Political Quarterly25: 416-423.
8.
Burrell, Barbara. 1988. “The Political Opportunity of Women Candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1984.”Women & Politics8 (1): 51-68.
9.
Burrell, Barbara. 1994. A Woman’s Place is in the House. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
10.
Canon, D. T.1990. Actors, Athletes and Astronauts. Chicago: University of Chicago.
11.
Carroll, Susan. 1985. “Political Elites and Sex differences in Political Ambition: A Reconsideration.”Journal of Politics47: 1231-1243.
12.
Carroll, Susan. 1994. Women as Candidates in American Politics, 2nd ed.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
13.
Carroll, Susan, and Wendy Strimling. 1983. Women’s Routes to Elective Office: A Comparison with Men’s. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for the American Woman and Politics.
14.
Chamberlin, Hope. 1973. A Minority of Members: Women in the U.S. Congress. New York: Praeger.
15.
Clark, Janet, Charles Hadley, and Robert Darcy. 1989. “Political Ambition Among Men and Women State Party Leaders.”American Politics Quarterly17 (2): 194-207.
16.
Constantini, Edmond. 1990. “Political Women and Political Ambition.”American Journal of Politics34: 741-770.
17.
Conway, M. Margaret. 2000. Political Participation in the United States, 3rd ed.Washington, DC.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
18.
Conway, M. Margaret, Gertrude Steuernagel, and David W. Ahern. 1997. Women and Political Participation. Washington, DC.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
19.
Costain, Anne. 1992. Inviting Women’s Rebellion: A Political Process Interpretation of the Women’s Movement. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
Darcy, Robert, Susan Welch, and Janet Clark. 1994. Women, Elections and Representation, 2nd ed.Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
21.
Deber, Raisa. 1982. “The Fault Dear Brutus: Women as Congressional Candidates in Pennsylvania.”Journal of Politics44 (2): 463-479.
22.
Diamond, Irene. 1977. Sex Roles in the State House. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
23.
Dolan, Kathleen, and Lynne Ford. 1997. “Change and Continuity Among Women State Legislators: Evidence from Three Decades.”Political Research Quarterly50: 137-151.
24.
Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs. 1993. Women in Law, 2nd ed.Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
25.
Fiorina, Morris P.1989. Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment, 2nd ed.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
26.
Fiorina, Morris P.2001. “Keystone Reconsidered.” In Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, Congress Reconsidered, 7th ed.Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Fowlkes, D, J. Perkins, and Sue Rinehart. 1979. “Gender Roles and Party Roles.”American Political Science Review73: 772-780.
29.
Fox, Richard Logan. 1997. Gender Dynamics in Congressional Elections. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
Francis, Wayne, and Lawrence W. Kenny. 2000. Up the Political Ladder: Career Paths in U.S. Politics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Gertzog, Irwin. 1995. Congressional Women: Their Recruitment, Integration, and Behavior, 2nd ed.Westport, CT: Praeger.
32.
Gertzog, Irwin, and Michele Simard. 1991. “Women and ‘Hope-less’ Congressional Candidacies: Nomination Frequency, 1916-1978.”American Politics Quarterly9: 449-466.
33.
Gruberg, Martin. 1968. Women in Politics: A Source Book. New York: Academic Press.
34.
Herrick, Rebekah. 1995. “A Reappraisal of the Quality of Women Candidates.”Women & Politics15: 25-38.
35.
Jennings, M. Kent, and Norman Thomas. 1968. “Men and Women in Party Elites: Social Roles and Political Resources.”Midwest Journal of Political Science12: 462-492.
36.
Johnson, M., and Sue Carroll. 1978. “Profile of Women Holding Office.”New Brunswick, NJ: Center for the American Woman and Politics.
37.
Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman. New York: Columbia University Press.
38.
Kincaid, Diane. 1978. “Over His Dead Body: A Positive Perspective on Widows in the U.S. Congress.”Western Political Quarterly31 (1): 96-104.
39.
King, Gary, Michael Tomz, and Jason Wittenberg. 2000. “Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation.”American Journal of Political Science44: 341-355.
40.
King, Gary, and Langche Zeng. 2001a. “Explaining Rare Events in International Relations.”International Organization55: 693-715.
41.
King, Gary, and Langche Zeng. 2001b. “Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data.”Political Analysis9: 1-27.
42.
Kirkpatrick, Jeane. 1974. Political Woman. New York: Basic Books.
43.
Kirkpatrick, Jeane. 1976. The New Presidential Elite: Men and Women in National Politics. New York: Russell Sage.
44.
Lamson, Peggy. 1968. Few Are Chosen. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
45.
Matthews, Donald. 1960. U.S. Senators and their World. New York: Vintage Books.
46.
Mayhew, David. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
47.
Mazey, Susan. 1980. “The Effects of Sex on Recruitment: Connecticut Local Offices.” In Debra Stewart, ed., Women in Politics. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow.
48.
McGlen, Nancy, and Karen O’Connor. 1998. Women, Politics and American Society, 2nd ed.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
49.
Norrander, Barbara, and Clyde Wilcox. 1998. “The Geography of Gender Power: Women in State Legislatures.” In Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox, eds., Women in Elective Office. New York: Oxford University Press.
50.
Ornstein, Norman J.1975. “Causes and Consequences of Congressional Change: Subcommittee Reforms in the House of Representatives, 1970-1973.” In Norman J. Ornstein, ed., Congress in Change: Evolution and Reform. New York: Praeger.
51.
Palmer, Barbara, and Dennis Simon. 2001. “Breaking the Logjam: The Emergence of Women as Congressional Candidates.” In Karen O’Connor, ed., Women and Congress: Running, Winning, and Ruling. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
52.
Price, H. Douglas. 1975. “Congress and the Evolution of Legislative ‘Professionalism.’” In Norman J. Ornstein, ed., Congress in Change: Evolution and Reform. New York: Praeger.
53.
Rhode, David. 1979. “Risk-Bearing and Progressive Ambition: The Case of Members of the United States House of Representatives.”American Journal of Political Science23 (1): 1-26.
54.
Sapiro, Virginia. 1982. “Private Costs of Public Commitments or Public Costs of Private Commitments? Family Roles versus Political Ambition.”American Journal of Political Science26: 265-279.
55.
Sapiro, Virginia. 1983. The Political Integration of Women: Roles, Socialization, and Politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
56.
Schlesinger, Joseph. 1966. Ambition and Politics: Political Careers in the United States. Chicago: Rand McNally.
57.
Schlesinger, Joseph. 1985. “The New American Political Party.”American Political Science Review79: 1152-1169.
58.
Schlesinger, Joseph. 1991. Political Parties and Winning Office. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59.
Seligman, Lester. 1961. “Political Recruitment and Party Structure: A Case Study.”American Political Science Review5: 77-86.
60.
Simon, Dennis, and Barbara Palmer. 2000. “Filling the Pipeline: Women and the Political Hierarchy, 1956-1998.” Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Southern Political Science Association, Atlanta.
61.
Smith, Eric R. A. N., and Richard Fox. 2001. “The Electoral Fortunes of Women Candidates for Congress.”Political Research Quarterly54 (1): 205-222.
62.
Thompson, Joan Hulce. 1985. “Career Convergence: Election of Women and Men to the House of Representatives, 1916-1975.”Women & Politics5 (1): 69-90.
63.
Tolchin, Susan, and Martin Tolchin. 1974. Clout: Womanpower and Politics. New York: Putnam Capricorn Books.
64.
Tomz, Michael, Gary King, and Langche Zeng. 1999. “RELOGIT: Rare Events Logistical Regression.” Version 1.1. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
65.
Tomz, Michael, Jason Wittenberg, and Gary King. 2001. Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
66.
Welch, Susan, and Donley Studlar. 1996. “The Opportunity Structure for Women’s Candidacies and Electability in Britain and the United States.”Political Research Quarterly49 (4): 861-874.
67.
Werner, Emmy. 1966. “Women in Congress: 1917-1964.”Western Political Quarterly19: 16-30.
68.
Williams, Christine. 1990. “Women, Law and Politics: Recruitment Patterns in the Fifty States.”Women & Politics10: 103-123
