The 2018 Midterm Elections: How to Increase Women’s Representation

The 2018 midterm election was historic, as great numbers of women ran and won national political office and now claim 23.5 seats in the House. For decades, America has been criticized for its lack of women in local, state, and national office. The midterm elections mark an important step in the recruitment and election of women into national politics.




Although the 2018 election was an important step for women’s representation, it does reveal the gender inequality that has long existed in America politics. Having 23.5% of seats taken by women is an accomplishment, but this number is still below the global average of 24.1%. In 2016, the US ranked 101 out of 193 in terms of women in congress, making America tied with Kyrgyzstan. With all the progress the country is making, it is woefully behind in creating equal representation for women.

So what can be done? How can America increase female participation in politics? Researchers talk about restructuring the election system, instituting proportional representation, creating mandates for certain numbers of women in office. However, these changes will require a constitutional convention, years of negotiations, and dramatic shifts in how American politics is run. There are other avenues to change that could yield more immediate results. Research has shown that the influence of political parties could be vital in creating opportunities for women in politics. Political parties could be the key to increasing women’s representation.

Political parties play an important role in nominating candidates to run for office. Studies show that women win elections at the same rate as men. Voters will vote for female politicians if female politicians are nominated by the party. The American public does not struggle with machismo culture or incredible dislike for female politicians. However, fewer women are entering primary races, and those who enter have less support. This leads to little increase in gender representation. If changes were made by political parties in the nomination process, the representation of women in political office would likely increase.

If there are fewer women candidates running in primaries, could parties be forced to run more women in these elections? In American politics, quotas like this may not succeed. National voting districts are single member districts that are candidate based instead of party based. Instead of creating party lists as is done in many European parliaments, parties run primaries to determine who runs in each area. Depending on state laws, party elites may have little influence in choosing who runs. In Europe, many parties are willing to pay fines instead of fielding candidates that are equally representative. The solution to gender equality is more complicated than passing a quota law.





Although parties cannot force women candidates into primaries, they have an undeniable influence in recruiting women. In fact, the 2018 midterm election highlighted the difference between parties in the recruitment of women. Although the total number of women in the House increased in 2018, the number of women from the Republican party decreased from 23 to 13. Republican women in the Senate hit a record high of 8, but Democrats have 17 female senators. Why is there such a difference between Republicans and Democrats in women’s representation? Researchers point to statistics showing a greater number of women in the Democrat party and Trump’s unpopularity among women generally. However, Democrats may simply be more successful at providing financial support and training to female candidates.

American campaigns are expensive, with thousands of dollars spent on ads, campaign staff, and travel. Political parties have the power to bankroll primary campaigns or raise money through PAC’s to support candidates. The Democrats have taken great strides in improving the financial system for female candidates. EMILY’s List, a PAC supporting female Democrats, spent over $100 million in the 2018 election alone. EMILY is an acronym for Early Money is Like Yeast. Democrats recognize the value of supporting women early, in the primary stage, which allows them opportunities to run in general elections and win seats in office. Republicans lack the internal coordination and fundraising of the Democrats. The Value in Electing Women PAC has spent only $6.5 million over the last two decades on women’s campaigns. Republican national leaders are more distanced from primaries and usually less willing to step up support for candidates before the general election.

Besides fundraising efforts, political parties can influence gender representation through informal recruitment. In general, men are more likely to seek public office. Women may fear the time commitment of campaigning and the cutthroat political world. Many women are more likely to consider campaigns if party leaders personally contact them and invite them to participate. Women are more likely to feel comfortable campaigning if they feel that they are part of a larger cause.

The 2018 Elections were an important step forward, but political parties need to increase their support of women if the US is to reach equal representation in national political office.