Issues and policies pertaining to children and families are often labeled “women’s issues” and assumed to be on the radar of all women, but we argue that they are more salient for mothers, particularly working mothers, than for other women. This study examines the role of motherhood as an identity for women in Congress by looking at the introduction of bills that affect children and families from 1973 through 2013. We define working mothers as women who have children below 18 years of age at home while they are in office, as opposed to those who have adult children or no children. Our findings show that Congressional working mothers are more likely to introduce legislation that address issues specific to parents and children. We also find that legislation specifically dealing with children’s health and welfare is more likely to be introduced by members with children than those without.
AnziaS. F.BerryC. R. (2011). The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson effect: Why do congresswomen outperform congressmen?American Journal of Political Science, 55, 478-493.
2.
BarnelloM. A.BrattonK. A. (2007). Bridging the gender gap in bill sponsorship. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 32, 449-474.
3.
BerkmanM. B.O’ConnorR. E. (1993). Do women legislators matter? Female legislators and state abortion policy. American Politics Quarterly, 21, 102-124.
4.
BrattonK. A.HaynieK. L. (1999). Agenda setting and legislative success in state legislatures: The effects of gender and race. Journal of Politics, 61, 658-679.
5.
BurdenB. C. (2007). Personal roots of representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
BurrellB. C. (1994). A woman’s place is in the house. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
7.
CelisK. S.ChildsS. (2012). The substantive representation of women: What to do with conservative claims?Political Studies, 60, 213-225.
DwyerC. E.StevensD.SullivanJ. L.AllenB. (2009). Racism, sexism, and candidate evaluations in the 2008 US presidential election. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 9, 223-240.
16.
ElderL. (2004). Why women don’t run: Explaining women’s underrepresentation in America’s political institutions. Women & Politics, 26(2), 27-56.
17.
ElderL.GreeneS. (2012). The politics of parenthood: Parenthood effects on issue attitudes and candidate evaluations in 2008. American Politics Research, 40, 419-449.
18.
ElderL.GreeneS. (2016). The politics of Walmart moms: Parenthood and political attitudes in the 2012 election. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 37, 369-393.
19.
FoerstelK.FoerstelH. N. (1996). Climbing the hill: Gender conflict in Congress. Westport, CT: Praeger.
20.
FowlerL. L.McClureR. D. (1989). Political ambition. New York, NY: Yale University Press.
21.
FoxR. L. (2000). Gender and congressional elections. In Tolleson-RinehartS.JosephsonJ. (Eds.), Gender and American politics (pp. 227-256). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
22.
FoxR. L.LawlessJ. L. (2004). Entering the arena? Gender and the decision to run for office. American Journal of Political Science, 48, 264-280.
23.
FoxR. L.LawlessJ. L. (2010). If only they’d ask: Gender, recruitment, and political ambition. The Journal of Politics, 72, 310-326.
24.
FrederickB. (2009). Are female house members still more liberal in a polarized era? The conditional nature of the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation. Congress & the Presidency, 36, 181-202.
25.
FrederickB. (2010). Gender and patterns of roll call voting in the U.S. Senate. Congress & the Presidency, 37, 103-124.
26.
FrederickB. (2011). Gender turnover and roll call voting in the U.S. Senate. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 32, 193-210.
27.
FultonS. A.MaestasC. D.MaiselL. S.StoneW. J. (2006). The sense of a woman: Gender, ambition, and the decision to run for congress. Political Research Quarterly, 59, 235-248.
28.
GertzogI. N. (1984). Congressional women: Their recruitment, treatment and behavior. New York, NY: Praeger.
29.
GlynnA. N.SenM. (2015). Identifying judicial empathy: Does having daughters cause judges to rule for women’s issues?American Journal of Political Science, 59, 37-54.
30.
GoochL. M. (2006). When politics is personal: The role of personal policy interest in legislative activity (Doctoral dissertation). University of Oklahoma, Norman.
31.
GreeneS. (2003). The psychological development of girls and women: Rethinking changing time. New York, NY: Routledge.
32.
GreenleeJ. S. (2010). Soccer moms, hockey moms and the question of “transformative” motherhood. Politics & Gender, 6, 405-431.
33.
GreenleeJ. S. (2014). The political consequences of motherhood. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
34.
HochschildA.MachungA. (2012). The second shift: Working families and the revolution at home. New York, NY: Penguin Random House.
35.
JewellM.WhickerM. L. (1993). The feminization of leadership in state legislatures. PS: Political Science & Politics, 26, 705-712.
McMahonM. (1995). Engendering motherhood: Identity and self-transformation in women’s lives. Perspectives on marriage and the family. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
46.
MercerR. (2004). Becoming a mother versus maternal role attainment. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 36, 226-232.
47.
NuttbrockL.FreudigerP. (1991). Identity salience and motherhood: A test of Stryker’s theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 146-157.
48.
Office of History and Preservation, Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives. (2006). Women in Congress 1917-2006: House concurrent resolution No. 66. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
49.
OsbornT. L. (2012). How women represent women: Political parties, gender and representation in the state legislatures. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
50.
PalmerB.SimonD. (2006). Breaking the political glass ceiling. New York, NY: Routledge.
51.
PalmerB.SimonD. (2012). Women and congressional elections: A century of change. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
52.
PhillipsA. (1995). The politics of presence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
53.
PitkinH. F. (1967). The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
54.
PooleK. T.RosenthalH. (1997). Congress: A political-economic history of roll call voting. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
55.
PooleK. T.RosenthalH. (2001). D-nominate after 10 years: A comparative update to congress: A political-economic history of roll-call voting. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 26, 5-29.
56.
ReingoldB. (2000). Representing women: Sex, gender, and legislative behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Saint-GermainM. A. (1989). Does their difference make a difference? The impact of women on public policy in the Arizona legislature. Social Science Quarterly, 70, 956-968.
59.
SchreiberR. (2002). Injecting a woman’s voice: Conservative women’s organizations, gender consciousness, and the expression of women’s policy preferences. Sex Roles, 47, 331-342.
60.
SchreiberR. (2012). Mama grizzlies compete for office. New Political Science, 34, 549-563. doi:10.1080/07393148.2012.729742
StalsburgB. L. (2010). Voting for mom: The political consequences of being a parent for male and female candidates . Politics & Gender, 6, 373-404.
65.
StrykerS. (1968). Identity salience and role performance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 30, 558-564.
66.
SwersM. L. (1998). Are congresswomen more likely to vote for women’s issue bills than their male colleagues?Legislative Studies Quarterly, 23, 435-448.
67.
SwersM. L. (2001). Understanding the policy impact of electing women: Evidence from research on congress and state legislatures. PS: Political Science & Politics, 34, 217-220.
68.
SwersM. L. (2002). The difference women make. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
69.
SwersM. L. (2005). Connecting descriptive and substantive representation: An analysis of sex differences in co-sponsorship activity. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30, 407-433.
70.
SwersM. L. (2013). Women in the club: Gender and policy making in the senate. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
ThomasM.BittnerA. (Eds.). (2017). Mothers and others: The role of parenthood in politics. Vancouver, Canada: University of British Columbia Press.
73.
ThomasS. (1994). How women legislate. New York: Oxford University Press.
74.
VegaA.FirestoneJ. (1995). The effects of gender on congressional behavior and the substantive representation of women. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 20, 213-222.
75.
VoldenC.WisemanA. E. (2014). Legislative effectiveness in the United States: The lawmakers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
76.
VoldenC.WisemanA. E.WittmerD. E. (2013). When are women more effective lawmakers than men?American Journal of Political Science, 57, 326-341.
77.
WashingtonE. L. (2008). Female socialization: how daughters affect their legislator fathers voting on women’s issues. American Economic Review, 98, 311-332.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
