Elections 1992 and the Thomas Appointment

Abstract

It is tempting to look at the results of the 1992 election season and to observe women candidates' successes and say, yes, it was the “year of the woman.” It might also be inviting to attribute women's electoral gains to the attention that the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings received and the anger many women felt towards the all-white male Senate Judiciary Committee with its cavalier treatment of Anita Hill and its insensitivity to sexual harassment. Yet, women's electoral gains must be viewed within the wider lens focus of changing patterns of American politics.The Thomas-Hill interaction was seen by some as a reflection of institutionalized gender inequality and insensitivity (Palley and Palley 1992). It underscored the need to press forward with the liberal cultural agenda, which incorporates feminist concerns with gender equity and electoral opportunity. Though the Thomas confirmation hearings made many people aware and angry, other conditions also helped to make 1992 an opportunity year for women and minorities. In particular, there was redistricting, a large number of retirements from Congress, and anti-incumbency feelings running high among American voters. Furthermore, though women were serving in political office, albeit in state and local positions and thus were in “the pipeline” and ready for the opportunity to contest state-wide and congressional positions, they were often seen as the ultimate outsiders. To be perceived as an outsider in an anti-incumbency era enhanced the candidacies of many women. Also, due to redistricting, many seats which women candidates contested were open seats for which their opponents lacked high degrees of political organization and the ability to “call in favors.”