2006 Election: What about the Women?

In the most general terms, women were critical to the ascension of Democrats in this election. Particulary the Senate:

In four of the six Senate races that Democrats won to gain control of the chamber, women's votes decided the outcome. This was especially true in the pivotal Virginia contest, where Democrat Jim Webb won 55 percent of women's votes, but only 45 percent of men's. Democratic Senate pickups in Rhode Island, Missouri and Montana also were possible only because of the gender gap. "It couldn't be much clearer," Eleanor Smeal, president of the political action group Feminist Majority Foundation said. "If only men voted, we would have a Republican Senate."

Ok, great, we flexed our muscle and got the Senate. But how about the women candidates this cycle? Two of the newly elected senators, Amy Klobuchar and Claire McCaskill will bump the ranks of female legislators in that chamber to 16. But thus far, we've only picked up three in the House, out of 20-some that ran (with a few still unresolved races). Why might that be?

Darcy Burner has a theory, considered by Lynn Allen at Evergreen Politics:

[Darcy] looked at the 20 Democratic challengers who had raised $1 million by the end of June.  Of those, 13 won and 7 lost.  Of the 13 who won, Ed Perlmutter (CO-6), Joe Courtney (CT-2), Chris Murphy (CT-5), Ron Klein (FLA-22), Brad Ellsworth (IND-8), Baron Hill (IND-9), Heath Schuler (NC-11), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20), Charlie Wilson (OH-6), Joe Sestak (PA-7), Nick Lampson (TX-22), Peter Welch (VT-at large) and Steve Kagen (WI-8), all but one were men.  Of the 7 who lost, Burner (WA-8), Diane Farrell (CT-4), Tammy Duckworth (IL-6), Patricia Madrid (NM-1), John Cranley (OH-1), Mary Jo Kilroy (OH-15), Lois Murphy (PA-06), all but one were women.

Burner and Allen speculate that the background of the Iraq war worked against women challengers in this cycle, that voters in these swing or red districts weren't comfortable voting for a woman when Iraq was the issue. All of these candidates met at least one threshhold for viability--ability to raise money. All were challengers, some challenging women, some men.

So what are we left with? I think it needs more examination, including whether they were running for open seats or against incumbents, the voter profile of the individual districts (how "red" are they), what local issues or ballot initiatives might have influenced the vote--the list of influencing factors is almost limitless, which is one thing that makes elections analysis so difficult and intriguing.

So I don't have an answer, but my gut feeling is that yes, women challengers running against the backdrop of war are going to have an extra hurdle. Of course this is going to be one of the primary factors Hillary Clinton has to consider in pondering a race in '08, because Iraq is highly unlikely to have gone away by then.