For Billy. :-)

http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/16/women-are-the-only-adults-left-in-washington/print/

Women Are the Only Adults Left in Washington

With the federal government at shutdown's door, the 20 female Senate members 
are setting new standards for civility and bipartisanship. Look out, old boys' 
club


Andrew Burton / Getty Images
Senators Murkowski, Ayotte, center, and Collins, right, broke the logjam to 
open the government and avert default.

This article appears in the October 28, 2013 issue of TIME under the title “The 
Last Politicians.” To subscribe to TIME magazine for $2.99 a month, please 
click here.

At one of the darkest moments of the government shutdown, with markets dipping 
and both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue hurling icy recriminations, Maine 
Republican Susan Collins went to the Senate floor to do two things that none of 
her colleagues had yet attempted. She refrained from partisan blame and 
proposed a plan to end the crisis. “I ask my Democratic and Republican 
colleagues to come together,” Collins said on Oct. 8. “We can do it. We can 
legislate responsibly and in good faith.”

Senate Appropriations Committee chair Barbara Mikulski, a Maryland Democrat, 
happened to be standing nearby, and she soon picked up a microphone and joined 
in. “Let’s get to it. Let’s get the job done,” she said. “I am willing to 
negotiate. I am willing to compromise.” Ten minutes later, a third Senator 
stood to speak. “I am pleased to stand with my friend from Maine, Senator 
Collins, as she has described a plan which I think is pretty reasonable,” said 
Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski. “I think it is pretty sensible.”

As with most anything that happens on C-SPAN, the burst of bipartisan vibes was 
meant to send a message. But behind the scenes, the wheels really were turning. 
Most of the Senate’s 20 women had gathered the previous night for pizza, salad 
and wine in the offices of New Hampshire Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat. 
All the buzz that night was about Collins’ plan to reopen the government with 
some basic compromises. Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, proposed 
adding the repeal of the unpopular medical-­device tax. Senate Agriculture 
Committee chair Debbie Stabenow suggested pulling revenue from her stalled farm 
bill. In policy terms, it was a potluck dinner.

In the hours that followed, those discussions attracted more Senators, 
including some men, and yielded a plan that would lead to genuine talks between 
Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch ­McConnell to end the shutdown. The ­pieces 
were all there: extending the debt ceiling and reopening the government with 
minor adjustments to the ­implementation of Obamacare. No one doubted the 
origin. “The women are an incredibly positive force because we like each 
other,” Klobuchar boasted to TIME as the negotiations continued. “We work 
together well, and we look for common ground.”

It’s quite an irony that the U.S. Senate was once known for having the worst 
vestiges of a private men’s club: unspoken rules, hidden alliances, off-hours 
socializing and an ethic based at least as much on personal relationships as 
merit to get things done. That Senate—a fraternal paradise that worked despite 
all its obvious shortcomings—is long gone. And now the only place the old boys’ 
network seems to function anymore is among the four Republicans and 16 
Democrats who happen to be women.

Cigars and poker are out. The women’s club offers some of the same benefits 
that came in the original men’s version, as well as some updates: mentor 
lunches and regular dinners, started decades ago by Mikulski, the 
longest-serving woman in the Senate, but also bridal and baby showers and 
playdates for children and grandchildren. An unspoken rule among what Collins 
calls “the sisterhood” holds that the women refrain from publicly criticizing 
one another. And there is a deep sense that more unites them personally than 
divides them politically. “One of the things we do a bit better is listen,” 
says North Dakota Democrat ­Heidi Heitkamp. “It is about getting people in a 
room with different life experiences who will look at things a little 
differently because they’re moms, because they’re daughters who’ve been taking 
care of senior moms, because they have a different life experience than a lot 
of senior guys in the room.”

The notion that women in power function differently from men, more 
­collaboratively and thus more effectively, has long been an intuitively 
appealing but empirically unproven theory. Lately, the U.S. Senate has been 
running a lab test. Women now chair or sit as ranking members of 10 of the 
Senate’s 20 committees and are responsible for passing the vast majority of 
legislation this year, whether it be the budget, the transportation bill, the 
farm bill, the Water Resources Development Act or the Violence Against Women 
Act. They have driven the debate on everything from derivatives reform to 
sexual assault in the military.

Perhaps most important, they are showing how to make things happen. “I am very 
proud that these women are stepping forward,” says Senator John McCain, the 
Arizona Republican. “Imagine what they could do if there were 50 of them.”

(MORE: 11 Things You Don’t Know About the Senate Sisterhood)

Civility Above All

Whatever anyone says, official Washington remains a hidebound city. At the 
White House and on K Street, women still struggle for the top jobs, and in the 
House, the sole chairwoman, Candice Miller, leads a committee that oversees the 
Capitol’s in-house staff, cleaning and maintenance, shops and gardens. 
Inappropriate behavior, casual chauvinism and old-fashioned views of gender 
roles still pervade everyday life. A Senator waiting to get on an elevator once 
barked at Klobuchar that it was for Senators only. Her aide informed the man 
that she was a Senator. As the doors slid closed on his stunned face, Klobuchar 
quipped with a smile, “And who are you?” Almost all the Senate women have 
stories of being kept out of rooms, clubs, caucuses and huddles, of being 
patronized, hit on and scolded for abandoning their children. “Running for 
Senate, I did get a number of people who would ask, ‘What’s going to happen to 
your children?’” Kelly Ayotte, Republican Senator from New Hampshire, says. “My 
husband would be offended by that too.”

Against that backdrop, the private gatherings among the sisterhood are a source 
of both power and perspective. They occur every few weeks or months, depending 
on the need. Venues include the Senators’ homes—and occasionally the unlikely 
confines of the Capitol’s Strom Thurmond Room, a space named for one of the 
chamber’s most notorious womanizers. “We started the dinners 20 years ago on 
the idea that there has to be a zone of civility,” says Mikulski. Once a year 
the group also dines with the female Supreme Court Justices. Dianne Feinstein, 
who chairs the Select Committee on Intelligence, holds regular dinners for 
women in the national-­security world. Even the female chiefs of staff and 
communications directors have started regular get-togethers of their own. In 
April the Senate women breached their no-outsider rule by agreeing to dine at 
the White House with President Obama. Going around the table, California 
Senator Barbara Boxer remarked that 100 years ago they’d have been meeting 
outside the White House gates to demand the right to vote. (“A hundred years 
ago, I’d have been serving you,” Obama replied.)

It’s a diverse group, ranging in age from Feinstein, who is 80, to Ayotte, who 
is 45. Feinstein makes herself available to every new female Senator who wants 
advice on how she runs her offices. In her trademark pearls, she is Pacific 
Heights proper and even has a dress code for her staff: stockings and skirts of 
a certain length. Meanwhile, Ayotte and New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a 
Democrat, get down and dirty during softball practice for a charity team they 
both play on and have been spotted in their offices in sneakers, still covered 
in mud.

Close political alliances have developed among several of the women. Boxer has 
taken a special interest in Massachusetts’ Elizabeth Warren—both are liberal 
firebrands. Democrat Claire McCaskill, who hails from a red state and faced a 
tough re-election campaign last year, made a point of courting Republican 
friendships early on. Sometimes those friendships trump party: Ayotte refused 
to campaign for fellow Republican Todd Akin, McCaskill’s opponent in 2012, and 
pointedly condemned him when he started sharing his theories about how women’s 
biology offers a natural defense against pregnancy from “legitimate” rape.

In private and public, strict rules of civility are enforced. At one recent 
dinner, Warren brought up antiabortion bills pending in the House, railing 
against Republicans for their “war against women.” Her complaint was greeted 
with admonitions from her fellow Democrats: We don’t talk about partisan issues 
here. Two of the 20 women are pro-life: Ayotte and Nebraska Republican Deb 
Fischer.

(MORE: Obama Signs Bill to End Government Shutdown, Avoid Default)

A Greater Responsibility

When Heitkamp voted against tightening gun laws after the Newtown school 
shooting, she was unprepared for the backlash, particularly from women’s 
groups. “A female friend in the Senate said to me, ‘You know, it’s because they 
feel you represent all women, not just the women of North Dakota,’” Heitkamp 
says. “And it just clicked for me for the first time. I was, like, ‘Oh, now I 
get it.’”

Most of the Senators say they feel they speak not just for the voters in their 
states but for women across America. Over the years they have pushed through 
legislation that has vastly expanded funding of women’s- and children’s-health 
research, testing and treatment. They’ve passed the Lilly ­Ledbetter Fair Pay 
Act and other anti­discrimination laws. And they’ve won federally mandated 
maternity and family medical leave. While most of these efforts were driven by 
Democrats, the women are strongest when they unite on legislation like the 
Homemakers IRA, which allows tax-deductible contributions to retirement plans 
by stay-at-home parents.

In April 2011, at the end of the budget debate, Patty Murray, a Democratic 
Senator from Washington, got a call at home from majority leader Reid summoning 
her to the Capitol. It was 11 p.m., and she found a room full of men who’d been 
working to avert a government shutdown. They said they were close to a deal, 
but cuts to Planned Parenthood sought by House Republicans were still on the 
table. Murray, who is the highest-ranking female Senator in leadership, hit the 
roof. “Absolutely not,” she recalls telling them. She organized four press 
conferences with female members over the next three days to highlight the 
importance of Planned Parenthood for providing not just abortions but also 
contraception, mammograms and children’s health. The funding was preserved.

That doesn’t mean the women always win. During the immigration-bill markup, 
Hawaii’s Mazie Hirono grilled South Carolina ­Republican Lindsey Graham about 
college-diploma requirements for new visas. She noted the disparity in female 
access to education in the developing world. “Could you share with us how you 
think that unmarried women would fare under the merit system?” asked ­Hirono, 
who immigrated with her mother to the U.S. as a child. Graham replied that they 
could come with their families. Hirono, Murkowski and 10 other women introduced 
an amendment to allot visas to health workers, nannies and those in other 
traditionally female professions. Though the measure was popular, it failed to 
get a vote in the Senate.

What Hasn’t Changed

Most of the legislation passed by female chairs this year has been gender 
blind: Stabenow’s farm bill, Boxer’s transportation and water-resources bill, 
Murray’s budget and Mikulski’s appropriations bills. All four of those 
chairwomen say their success comes from a willingness to deal and a 
disinclination to grandstand. Stabenow divvied up the farm bill like “a big 
sister handing out chores,” says Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat on 
the Agriculture Committee. And she was tough: Leahy said he was glad when the 
bill passed, if only to stop Stabenow “from calling me in the middle of the 
night.” Mikulski is effective, says Reid, because “everyone’s afraid of her.”

Some elements of Senate life, meanwhile, remain unchanged. Women still have a 
long way to go to match the clout of their male colleagues. Twenty-five states 
have yet to elect a woman to the Senate. Many committees have yet to see female 
chairs. A recent Institute for Women’s Policy Research study showed that at the 
current rate, it would take more than a century for women to reach parity in 
Congress.

Collins and her co-conspirators get the lion’s share of the credit for starting 
the process to break the weeks-long stalemate over government spending and the 
debt ceiling. “We need to be pragmatic. This is not going to be a Republican 
solution or a Democratic solution. This is going to be a solution that is good 
for the country,” Murkowski told NBC’s Today show on Oct. 16. “The six women 
that have been working together do have a good bipartisan solution.” But even 
the fate of their bid to end the shutdown was illustrative of how far women 
have to go in the Senate. Shortly after proposing a basic outline and convening 
a working group of 12 Senators—half of them women—­Collins and her crew found 
the negotiations co-opted by the two party leaders, both male. Though much of 
the Collins plan became a part of the final talks, particularly the timelines 
and some small changes to Obamacare, the women no longer had control of the 
process.

That will likely have to wait a few more years, until a woman takes her place 
as majority or minority leader

INTERACTIVE MAP: These Are the Republicans Who Voted For Government Default


-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to