Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-27hcw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-09-11T00:44:19.339Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does an EMILY's List Endorsement Predict Electoral Success, or Does EMILY Pick the Winners?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2010

Rebecca J. Hannagan ,
Jamie P. Pimlott  and
Levente Littvay
Rebecca J. Hannagan
Affiliation:
Northern Illinois University
Jamie P. Pimlott
Affiliation:
Niagara University
Levente Littvay
Affiliation:
Central European University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Women's political action committees (PACs)—those committees founded by women to raise money for women candidates—have been and will likely continue to be an important part of American electoral politics. In this article, we investigate the impact of EMILY's List, because it is the standard bearer of women's PACs and is commonly cited as crucial to women's electoral success. Empirical studies of EMILY's List impact to date have largely assumed causal inference by using traditional linear models. We use a propensity score–matching model to leverage on causality and find that an EMILY endorsement helps some candidates and hurts others. Our findings set the stage for further and more nuanced investigations of when, where, and how EMILY's List can enhance the likelihood of electoral success for women.

Information

Type
Features
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , July 2010 , pp. 503 - 508
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aldrich, John H. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Party Politics in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, John H. 2000. “Southern Parties in the State and Nation.” Journal of Politics 63: 643–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrell, Barbara. 1990. “The Presence of Women Candidates and the Role of Gender in Campaigns for the State Legislature in an Urban Setting.” Women and Politics 10: 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrell, Barbara. 1993. “Party Decline, Party Transformation, and Gender Politics: The USA.” In Gender and Party Politics, ed. Lovenduski, Joni and Norris, Pippa, 291–308. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
Burrell, Barbara. 1994. A Woman's Place Is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrell, Barbara. 2006. “Political Parties and Women's Organizations: Bringing Women into the Electoral Arena.” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, ed. Carroll, Susan J. and Fox, Richard L., 143–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burton, Michael John, and Shea, Daniel M.. 2002. Campaign Mode: Strategic Vision in Congressional Elections. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Center for American Women, and Politics (CAWP). 2008. Fact Sheet: Women in Elective Office. Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/index.php.Google Scholar
Cooperman, Rosalyn. 2001. “Party Organizations and the Recruitment of Women Candidates to the U.S. House since the ‘Year of the Woman.’” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, CA, August 30–September 2.Google Scholar
Darcy, R., Welch, Susan, and Clark, Janet. 1994. Women, Elections and Representation. 2nd ed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Day, Christine L., and Hadley, Charles D.. 2005. Women's PACs: Abortion and Elections. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Dehejia, Rajeev H., and Wahba, Sadek. 2002. “Propensity Score-Matching Methods for Nonexperimental Causal Studies.” Review of Economics and Statistics 84: 151–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delli Carpini, M., and Fuchs, E. R.. 1993. “The Year of the Woman: Candidates, Voters, and the 1992 Elections.” Political Science Quarterly 108: 29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duerst-Lahti, Georgia. 1998. “The Bottle Neck, Women Candidates.” In Women in Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, ed. Thomas, Sue and Wilcox, Clyde, 15–25. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eagly, Alice H., and Carli, Linda L.. 2008. Through the Labyrinth: The Truth about How Women Become Leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Hartmann, Susan M. 1989. From Margin to Mainstream: American Women and Politics since 1960. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L. 2004. “Women, War, and Winning Elections: Gender Stereotyping in the Post September 11th Era.” Political Research Quarterly 57: 479–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Fox, Richard. 2005. It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Pearson, Kathryn. 2008. “The Primary Reason for Women's Underrepresentation? Reevaluating the Conventional Wisdom.” Journal of Politics 69: 1176–1209.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McDermott, Rose. 2002. “Experimental Methodology in Political Science.” Political Analysis 10:325–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niven, David. 2006. “Throwing Your Hat Out of the Ring: Negative Recruitment and the Gender Imbalance in State Legislative Candidacy.” Politics and Gender 2: 473–89.Google Scholar
Pimlott, Jamie P. 2006. “This Isn't Your Mother's Tupperware Party: How EMILY's List Changed the American Political Landscape.” Ph.D. diss., University of Florida.Google Scholar
Pimlott, Jamie P. 2007. “The Chosen Few: EMILY's List Endorsements, 2000–2006.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 12–15.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, Paul, and Rubin, D.. 1983. “The Central Role of Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects.” Biometrika 70:41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2002. “Gender Stereotypes and Vote Choice.” American Journal of Political Science 46: 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2006a. “Do Parties Know that ‘Women Win’? Party Leader Beliefs about Women's Electoral Chances.” Politics and Gender 2: 431–50.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2006b. Where Women Run: Gender and Party in the American States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Uhlaner, Carole Jean. 1986. “Candidate Gender and Congressional Campaign Receipts.” Journal of Politics 48: 30–50.Google Scholar