An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Secret to NH State Senate Female Majority: It Doesn’t Pay

Interestingly, this Women’s eNews article is the first one I’ve seen that finally gives a reason I can buy into understanding how it is that New Hampshire’s state senate, unlike any other legislative body in the country, now has a majority of women (13 out of 24):

Two major explanations for women’s newfound majority are the state’s high number of legislators and their low–practically nonexistent–pay.

New Hampshire’s Legislature has 424 members: 400 in the House and 24 in the Senate, making it the largest legislature in the United States and the fourth-largest English-speaking governing body in the world.

The New Hampshire General Court–as the state Legislature has called itself since its inception in 1784–is in session for six months, between January and June, and elected officials are paid only $100 per year, plus gas mileage, to serve.

Hmm – so what does that change about the job, since they still make law?

States such as New Hampshire and New Mexico, whose elected officials receive no compensation, tend to have a higher percentage of female representatives, says Ziegler, because the sessions are less time-consuming and the expectations and compensation are such that the people who serve think of themselves as public servants rather than professional politicians.

“Historically, a woman might just as easily have served in the state Legislature as the PTA,” says Sytek, the New Hampshire Republican.

So does this really undermine women’s gains? What about equal pay and the equal pay argument overall?

Isn’t the pro and con argument regarding freelance writers and whether to take publication opportunities that won’t pay the same: if we give it away for free, they’ll never pay us what we deserve and are worth?

More on what makes NH unique:

In New Hampshire, legislators are often retirees, stay-at-home mothers, small business owners and people with part-time, flexible hours that allow them to serve. Not surprisingly, this has led to greater participation by women. But changes in the economy and the work force during the past decade have also brought in a new breed.

“The new women running for office aren’t doing this as volunteer work in the traditional sense,” she says. “We’re seeing a lot of college faculty, women with their own law practices and others who are bringing their professional expertise to the job.”

Around the country, here’s what the gender make-up of state legislatures looks like:

Until November, women comprised one-third of the state Senate in neighboring Vermont, making it the current leader. It will lose that title to New Hampshire in January, although Vermont will continue to outrank New Hampshire–just barely–in terms of the overall percentage of women serving in the Legislature: Vermont will have 37.8 percent while New Hampshire’s figure will stand at 37.7 percent. The Colorado Legislature will remain 38 percent female, the highest in the country, but it does not have a female majority in either the House or the Senate.

Other states with a high portion of female legislators are Arizona, Minnesota, Hawaii, Maryland, Oregon and Maine.

Walsh attributes that to states’ populist–as opposed to liberal–heritage, where citizen legislatures encouraged women to participate in elective office.

At the other end of the spectrum, there are states, mostly in the South, that lag behind.

After the defeat earlier this month of five female candidates for the state Legislature, South Carolina will have no female representatives when its state Senate convenes in January. It will be the first time since 1979 that its state Senate has had no women in office.

In Ohio, we’ve seen State Senator Capri Cafaro rise to level of minority leader and Joyce Beatty cedes her House Majority role to Jennifer Garrison (although Armond Budish will become House Speaker). And we do pay our state legislators.

But still, thinking back to the NH state senate and New Mexico: is this progress? Progress of sorts? What?

I’ve written about women, elections and leadership recently here, here and here.

This post at Work It, Mom summarizes many of the “on the one hand – on the other hand” arguments about pay v. non-pay legislatures.

  • DLS
    Jill, overall this looks like a positive development, which most of us would expect to see, not only in New Hampshire but elsewhere. This isn't the 1960s and nobody (outside caricatured Religious Right stereotypes and the odd cult community, our lightweight version of the Taliban) finds it "odd" (much less outright wrong) that women are in political office. (Those of us who have worked for women before aren't surprised to have bosses who happen to be female, either.) Certainly there is no need (as with other interest groups on the Left) for Perpetual Victimhood Arrested At Or Around The Year 1965, Incorporated, or perversions of proportional representation in legislatures as creepy forms of affirmative action, demanding seats be allocated according to the exact complexion of populations as defined by sex, race or ethnicity, age, and so on. (Random selection from the population that is to be represented, the _entire_ population, is the only fair method that approaches this.)

    P.S. You're staying put so far as I know in Jillville (on the Lake), but you probably know others who have stories of various kinds to tell like the people on this site. Maybe someday places like _that_ will share news stories similar to Wyoming (female suffrage) or, contemporarily, New Hampshire.

    http://burghdiaspora.blogspot.com/
  • Hey! After all these months, NOW you enlighten me about what looks like a pretty cool Cleveland blog!? Sure - embarrass me!

    (sarcasm)

    I've never heard of that blog - will definitely blogroll it and take a look. I'm trying to figure out what I'm doing next - have a few ideas, having a lot of coffee and lunches w/people who I hope have some good ideas. I'm actually thinking about a woman's PAC for Ohio left of center candidates. But nothing sure yet - at all. I'm open to all ideas. :)
  • NewHampshire
    Figures it would not take long for someone to make a gender issue out of this! No one has ever expected to be paid for their stint in the legislature, male or female.

    The gains are that people are willing to vote for a woman as well as a man.
    Trouble is not which gender is in there, but the fact that they are all radical leftists in the majority. This is where NH is troubled, because this governor and his lefist majority have caused a $1B deficit.

    If women are more frugal, power to them. If not, vote them out I say.
  • DLS
    Jill, I enjoy touring "gritty cities" even though they represent in large part as failed a model as Detroit's business model (still a failure after almost thirty years to change after the Chrysler crisis so long ago).* It's interesting that there and in related places such as Upstate New York, many people stay put, not only growing roots, but refusing to leave. I hope it's worth the cost and effort for those who stay there. Our nation's history is a story of migration and we'll continue to see the mean population center move south and west** and with high taxes and home prices and other events, we see superimposed on the famous migration to California in past times, the "spinoff" of people from California thoughout the West, the Eastern phenomenon of people going south, and the massive growth of Florida in the following material (the top-migration-flow maps are the most interesting here). (Note also areas where people stayed put, 30 years...)


    http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/ce...


    If the Big Three in Detroit fail, which is likely, even more people will be leaving Detroit metro and other parts of Michigan, and other places. (At least four cities in this metro area with auto plants have sought federal assistance if this happens. This is in addition to Detroit city, which is simply suffering from being run like Zimbabwe -- the new mayor cannot determine the current state of the city's finances, cannot make sense of what passes for financial records and accounts, at all -- and is in worse shape than other more vital cities elsewhere that are also seeking a bailout -- Atlanta and Phoenix, for example. Detroit city is so bad it's unfair to associate it with liberals or Democrats. Perhaps federal receivership and a Marshall Plan for it and the metro area should be in order, if not demoting Michigan to territorial status and applying reconstruction and revitalization to most or all of the state, not just Detroit and DET metro. It might be just the perfect test case and experimental subject for any Obamanian economic, employment, and infrastructure spending.)


    * Most people don't realize that Cleveland isn't the horrible place of 1960s and 1970s legend, nor Pittsburgh, to name someplace else. Cleveland actually is nice there on the lake, and I enjoy visiting the Lakewood area to the west of there when I'm in the area, too.


    ** I did a geometric series based on post-World-War-II migration based on successive Census data, and as I had guessed, Oklahoma City would be the approximate mean population center of the USA by 2100, and that's where a relocated federal capital should be placed, for those who like to speculate on such things. (This century Omaha or more fitting, Kansas City-Independence would be preferred for historical reasons as well as being closer to the current mean population center.)
  • DLS
    "NOW you enlighten me about what looks like a pretty cool Cleveland blog!?"

    I'm neglectful or otherwise "challenged," Jill. [self-directed sarcasm]. Sorry for the tardiness.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC