Running For Precedent How Would The Face Of American Politics Change With An Elizabeth Dole Presidential Candidacy, Or To A Lesser Extent, A Hillary Clinton Senate Bid? Political Observers Remain Far Apart As To What Impact They Might Have In Such Hi

Imagine Inauguration Day, January 2001. Elizabeth Hanford Dole takes the oath of office as the 43th president of the United States. A gold American eagle pin gleams from her lapel.

Beside her, grinning proudly, stands her husband, Bob Dole, the former Kansas senator destined to become an excellent presidential adviser but unlikely to be trusted with picking out the White House china.

This historic, role-reversing moment will be likely to pull the highest Inauguration Day broadcast ratings ever. Around the world, television viewers will flock to watch this unusual scene unfold.

But what will it take to reach this day? Are the American people ready to elect a woman president? And if so, what will it mean for the country in general, and for women in particular, to be led by a female president?

Some observers of American politics can’t imagine the country electing a woman president anytime soon. Yet others believe the groundwork has already been laid.

One of those is Mary Hawkesworth, director of the Center for the American Woman and Politics at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

“The political landscape would not have to change at all,” she says.

“We have lots of evidence amassed in the last 20 years that women are as good at raising money and running for office as men. We’re not facing the kind of entrenched gender bias that was present 30 or 40 years ago. There has been a substantial change.”

The number of women serving in the U.S. House of Representatives stands at an all-time high of 56. A record nine women serve in the U.S. Senate. In November, 91 women were elected to state executive posts, such as governor, secretary of state and attorney general, according to the center at Rutgers.

The White House Project, a nonpartisan public awareness campaign to elect a woman president by 2008, commissioned a recent poll. It showed that 76 percent of Americans are ready to elect a woman as president but simply haven’t had the chance.

Elizabeth Dole, who recently resigned her position with the Red Cross, has not announced her intention to run. But, says Hawkesworth, “She certainly has all the right qualifications, the right fund-raising ability and the right networks to do extremely well in the primary season. Whether or not she won the presidency would depend on who became the Democratic nominee.”

Will women be likely to vote for Elizabeth Dole simply because she’s female?

“I doubt it,” Hawkesworth says. “She is a conservative candidate. All of her record in public office is a record of commitment to conservative principles.”

Hawkesworth points out that in 1996 Elizabeth Dole took a pro-life stance. That will make it difficult to win the votes of pro-choice Democratic and independent women.

Hawkesworth also slays another myth. She doesn’t expect Elizabeth Dole to display a uniquely feminine management style.

“If you study the American presidency, you know there are markedly different ways presidents have chosen to organize their staff,” Hawkesworth says. Some presidents have surrounded themselves with free-wheeling discussion and multiple advisers. Others, like Richard Nixon, have run pyramid-style offices, giving very few people access to the president.

“It’s a mistake to say because you have a woman you would have a different organizational style,” Hawkesworth says.

Dole raised $3.5 billion for the Red Cross and oversaw 30,000 staff members and more than 1 million volunteers. Observers say she used a traditional chain-of-command and delegation style.

“We know Elizabeth Dole is a strong manager,” Hawkesworth says. “Her governance style would be probably very much like the style she used in two Cabinet positions and in the Red Cross.”

The question of how a woman president would govern fascinates political-science experts. Much attention has been paid in the recent decade to defining masculine and feminine leadership styles. It has been argued that male executives often use a hierarchical, top-down approach, while women listen more and lead by building consensus.

But the theories fly out the window when confronted with certain notable exceptions.

Walter Williams, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington’s Graduate School of Public Affairs, worked under Lyndon Johnson’s administration and later studied Great Britain with Margaret Thatcher as prime minister.

Margaret Thatcher and Lyndon Johnson were the two meanest, toughest leaders Williams says he has ever seen. In one of his books, Williams described them both as “brute forces.”

“(Margaret Thatcher) was considered the toughest man in Britain when she was prime minister,” Williams says.

“While it was said she was an extremely charming woman when she wanted to be, people were scared to death of her,” Williams says. “They called her `The Iron Lady’ - for good reason. She was as tough as nails.

“Someone wrote we would never see her likes again. And thank God.”

Williams found both Johnson and Thatcher possessed an unbelievable capacity to press on for what they wanted despite extreme opposition.

“It has often been argued that a woman leader would be more oriented toward peace and compromise and reconciliation than a man; a macho man wouldn’t want to be seen as having lost China,” Williams says.

But he doesn’t believe, based on his observation of other female rulers, that Elizabeth Dole would be any less warlike than Texas Gov. George W. Bush.

“Indira Gandhi was a ruthless person,” he says. “Power is power, whether you’re a woman or a man.

“If you want that power and want to keep that power, you’ll do what it takes to keep it.”

But in a presidential election, reality may be less significant than public perception.

And in the coming election season, one perception in particular could sway voters toward a woman candidate.

After two terms under Bill Clinton, who will go down in history as both a philanderer and a liar, Americans may be ready to vote for a candidate they perceive as highly principled and dignified. That’s where a female may have an edge.

“Generally speaking,” Williams says, “a woman is more likely to be seen as having a higher moral character than a man.”

Consider it the starchy schoolmarm factor. Think Catholic school nun. Or perhaps “Nurse Ratched.” That’s the label New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd recently gave Elizabeth Dole, for the tightly wound character from “One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest.”

What matters most is voter perception.

“People do think women are more ethical. That’s the conventional wisdom,” says Amy Mazur, associate professor of political science at Washington State University. “I don’t agree with that at all.”

Neither does she agree with the notion that female elected officials legislate differently than men.

“We do have a gender gap in voting,” Mazur says. “But the reality is a gender gap doesn’t translate into policies that are established by women once they are in office.”

Female politicians have few common characteristics, Mazur says. They’re cross-cut by lines of class, marital status, race and motherhood.

Unless the numbers of women reach critical mass - one-third of the members of Congress, for example - they’re unlikely to have an impact, even on the few key issues on which they agree, Mazur says.

“Pioneering women don’t have much of an influence,” she says.

Soon Washington state voters will be able to watch Mazur’s theory in action. This state has the highest percentage of women legislators in the country - 41 percent after the November election.

Susan Armitage, Washington State University history professor and editor of the women’s studies journal Frontiers, says the first women and minority men to be elected to political office resemble most the white men they’re replacing.

Some observers feel women will be likely to humanize politics, to make it softer and gentler.

“I think that’s pretty much a fantasy, too,” Armitage says.

So far, women in political office have not made an appreciable difference in public policy, she says.

“I automatically think that women will be more concerned about child welfare and the poor,” she says. “That is certainly not the political age we are in.”

Sally Winkle, director of Eastern Washington University’s Women’s Studies Center, says, “Much more important than the fact that there is a woman in the White House is which woman is in the White House,” she says.

Women voters tend to support Democratic candidates who promote issues such as education, child care and family leave. According to EMILY’s List, a group that helps fund the campaigns of pro-choice Democratic women, the gender gap in the last election was 18 points for California Sen. Barbara Boxer and 20 points for Patty Murray.

Says Winkle: “If a progressive, feminist man is running against Elizabeth Dole, feminists will be more likely to vote for the feminist man.”

It is clear that Elizabeth Dole will be viewed by women through the lens of their political party.

Kate McCaslin, a Spokane County commissioner and a Republican, sounds thrilled at the prospect of a Dole candidacy.

“If Elizabeth Dole is elected president, it will change everything forever for women,” McCaslin says. “It’s breaking the ultimate glass ceiling.”

McCaslin believes Dole to be an excellent role model who brings amazing professionalism and enthusiasm to her work.

“She has such strong leadership, but it’s not overpowering,” McCaslin says. “Through her graciousness, she makes people feel so at ease, and yet they perform.”

Jan Polek, who twice ran as a Democratic candidate for the Washington Legislature, describes Dole differently.

“She’s a very tough cookie,” Polek says. “She’s not a soft, motherly, compassionate person. She makes many women feel weak. She’s like, `Pull up your socks and get on with it. Don’t whine.”’

Polek’s gaze falls more fondly on Hillary Clinton, whom she can imagine managing the White House with a feminine, inclusive style.

“Elizabeth Dole would have a lot of men in her immediate circle,” Polek says. “Hillary Clinton would have a lot of top-notch women.”

While Hillary Clinton has given no indication of a desire to run for office, her name has been mentioned as a possible candidate for a U.S. Senate seat in New York.

“Hillary Clinton had a lot of respect before, but now she has won our hearts with her manner and her behavior,” Polek says.

Both women agree, however, that an Elizabeth Dole candidacy would change the face of American politics.

“If you have a woman president, that sets a lot of new precedents,” Polek says. “The doors would really be open to women at all levels.”

As to the likelihood of Dole winning?

Polek thinks Americans still harbor too much gender bias to elect a woman president.

“People talk in the abstract about equity and equality,” she says.

“When they get to the voting booth, that’s a private place. They vote what’s closest to their hearts.”

But McCaslin says, “I think it is extremely likely that she will be the vice presidential candidate. … I will also put it as highly likely that someday she will become president.”

If that historic day ever arrives, McCaslin predicts the impact will be huge.

“It’s saying, `Yes, women are not only capable of leading families, running businesses and holding legislative authority, they are now fully able to be executives in their own right.’ It’s the ultimate vote of public confidence.”

This sidebar appeared with the story: FOR MORE INFO INTERNET OFFERINGS If the prospect of electing America’s first female president intrigues you, several Internet sites can help you explore further. The White House Project, at thewhitehouseproject.org, lists a ballot of 20 American female candidates for president. Watch this site soon for the results of its mock election. The political network for pro-choice Democratic woman, EMILY’s List, examines the prospects of its favorite candidates at emilyslist.com. For current statistics and other research, try the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. It’s located at rci.rutgers.edu/~cawp.