Women and the Democratic Party: The Evolution of EMILY's List By ...

“…shedding the delicacy and aloofness that had precluded them from acting as decision makers and accepting instead a gloves-off approach to the culture and the trade-offs of the political marketplace” (Tolchin and Tolchin 1974, 27). The emergence of a new type of female candidate is linked to women's experience in the liberal women's movement. Movement politics had taught them about power—both its sources and its limits.

The introduction of a different type of female legislator in the late 1970s corresponds to a larger societal change, most notably an increased number of women obtaining graduate and professional degrees. As women began entering fields such as history, political science, and sociology, an increasing number turned their attention to understanding the role and place of women within each of these disciplines. By the mid-to-late 1970s, female scholars began asking questions about women's political participation, using the tools of their disciplines to find the answers and using the answers to inform their activism.¹⁵

While more women were going to college and entering the workforce than ever before, women were not acquiring wealth at the same rate as men. The gender gap in wages and the rise in the number of female-headed households meant that women had less disposable income. Thus, the irony of women's PACs at this time meant that those women who needed better representation in Congress most were unable to give money to the organizations that could help make those changes happen. Furthermore, running for political office was not something that the majority of women were willing or able to consider.

That began to change in the early 1980s. The gender gap in voting turnout disappeared in the 1980 presidential election, but a gender gap in vote choice emerged.¹⁶ The 1980 presidential election also brought the first anti-ERA, pro-life President into the Oval Office. The neo-conservative movement that began with