Family Structure and Political Ambition

Via the Monkey Cage, a new paper by Jennifer Lawless and Richard Fox:

Based on data from the 2011 Citizen Political Ambition Study – a new, national survey of nearly 4,000 “potential candidates” for all levels of office – we provide the first thorough analysis of the manner in which traditional family arrangements affect the initial decision to run for office. Despite a substantial gender gap in political ambition, and the persistence of traditional family structures and gender roles among potential candidates, our findings culminate to provide clear evidence that traditional family dynamics do not account for the gender gap in potential candidates‟ interest in running for office. Neither marital and parental status, nor the division of labor pertaining to household tasks and childcare, predict interest in pursuing elective office, taking steps typically associated with a campaign, or actually declaring a candidacy. Further, family arrangements do not influence patterns of political recruitment or potential candidates‟ self-evaluations of their qualifications to run for office, which serve as two leading predictors of political ambition. This is not to downplay the fact that the gender gap in political ambition remains substantial and unchanging. But it is to suggest that family arrangements are not a contributing factor.

They conclude by suggesting that structural and psychological barriers--namely political recruitment and  self-perceived qualification--are the major barriers to more women running for office.

One thing that surprised me was the lack of a question about child care workers. I have moved in the nanny circuit, and there was a presumption among the class of families (women and men in law, business, education, and political activism) sampled here that a child needs a nanny, or more accurately, that a mother needs a nanny [1]. The father's business (and for many of the father, 'business' is a very generous description of what they do or the time burdens imposed upon them) was, supposedly, far too consuming for them to take on a greater share of parental responsibilities. More often than not, these fathers also believed that the burden was shared relatively equally, although most would concede that their wives bore a slight disproportion. They figured, well shit, the kids exhaust me... there is no way she could be doing much more than I am. The mother knows better, and they get a nanny. I wouldn't expect this to have much of an effect, and certainly I agree that the structural impediment of candidate recruitment is the more important cause. But it was an odd omission.

[1] This is a biased sample of anecdotes on my part: I knew these people through nannies, and so of course they had normalized the belief that all families with members pursuing professional careers needed nannies.