The New Agenda - a voice for all women
Get Involved: Become a Member | Donate
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • Board of Directors
    • Welcome
    • FAQ’s
    • Contact Us
  • Media
    • Print & Internet
    • TV & Radio
    • Press Releases
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Past Events
    • Get Involved
    • Email Alerts
    • We Spoke Out!
    • Volunteer
  • Features
  • Blog
Home » Media - News Reporting & Analysis, Politics

Rose-Coloring Gender Diversity in the Obama Administration

June 25, 2009

by Judy SilvercloseAuthor: Judy Silver Name: Judy Silver
Email: blog@thenewagenda.net
Site:
About: See Authors Posts (49)

|
5 Comments
  • Email
  • Share
  • Tweet

nationaljournalIsn’t The National Journal embarrassed to call this journalism?  In conjunction with it’s Decision Makers issue, The National Journal has published “Obama’s Team:  the Face of Diversity,”  celebrating a rosy picture that – at least in the case of women — is contradicted by National Journal’s own data.   In his article highlighting the results of a survey of 366 of “the President’s Decision Makers,” James A. Barnes confesses to discarding 49 data points, people who previously worked for Bush and are mostly “white guys”.  Having thus distorted the data, Barnes concludes that Obama is a champion of diversity.  He writes:

The new look of government is, in part, a generational story.  From college campuses to corporate boardrooms to campaigns, society is increasingly tapping the professional talents of women and racial minorities.  But the new look also embodies the commitment [to diversity] of the first nonwhite male to hold the nation’s highest elective office.

So according to Barnes,  if we look back, we’ll find that the distorted percentage of women among President Obama’s “decision makers” is unprecedented in either previous generations or during the terms of previous presidents, right? 

Uh, no.  Here’s the new data combined with data from National Journal’s 2001 decision-makers issue:

obamabars3

The chart speaks for itself.  Even with the data being manipulated, the administration of 2009 has no higher percentage of women than the administration of 1997.  Barnes is reporting through change-colored glasses.

Barnes set the tone at the offset, beginning with happy-spin on old news, writing:

A mere glance around Barack Obama’s Cabinet table provides ample evidence of the president’s philosophy that diversity is an important element of good government. Fewer than half of the 22 officials designated by Obama as having Cabinet rank are white men — only nine in fact.

cabinetYet another “mere glance,”  at the photo accompanying the article shows why The New Agenda was disappointed with Obama’s cabinet:  Women, at 31% of the cabinet, are not represented in proportion to our population. 

Why does that matter?  Well, one reason is something that The National Journal pointed out in its 2005 Decision Makers issue:

Women are twice as likely to hold top positions in a Cabinet department run by a woman as in one run by a man.  On average, in the four departments with female secretaries, 45% of the top posts are held by women.  In the 11 departments run by men, only 22 percent of the top positions are held by women.

I couldn’t find any mention of The National Journal repeating that analysis on the current administration.  Maybe they did, but then threw out the data.

5 Comments »

  • denise castellazzo said:

    Without a women in the white house we will never make a dent in any administration. The only way women will get the respect in government is when one of us is in there. Women know about womens issues, men don’t.

    June 25, 2009 at 7:20 am
  • John Horning said:

    The Progressives and African-American elite will continue to declare Obama to be a Feminist and a Fierce Advocate for Gay Rights. Meanwhile, his administration will do nothing for either group unless enough political pressure is applied.

    June 25, 2009 at 8:52 am
  • Karen said:

    The Iranian government condones and encourages the torturing and mutiliation of homosexuals. Mousavi wanted to abolish the pasdar who beat up and scream at women who do not have their hair properly covered or their socks right.

    June 25, 2009 at 9:11 am
  • Nancy said:

    The under-representation of women in this administration is a national embarrassment.

    But who is responsible? Women had a chance to choose a woman (Clinton) with almost identical policies to Obama’s and far more experience. But they didn’t. Instead, they chose a man who had made it clear by then that he is NOT a feminist, but in fact pretty old-fashioned in this respect.

    Until women decide they want parity in government – and take it – and want a women’s agenda – and create and enact it – they are likely to remain second class citizens in the US.

    I for one look to the New Agenda to be one of the key women’s organizations that will bring about a coalition of women who support women for a better and fairer society.

    June 25, 2009 at 10:35 am
  • Amy Siskind said:

    It’s high time we all worked to get a woman – of either party – to the highest office!

    June 25, 2009 at 3:19 pm

Leave your Response

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Join Our National Movement »

Supporting women.
Ending sexism.
Finding common ground.

  • Become a Member
  • Get Email Alerts
  • Volunteer With Us

We’re in the Media »

Click to see our latest stories in the media

More Stories »

    Recent Comments

    • Bes: Rolling Stone Cover: Sexist, Pornographic, or What?
    • Janis: Rolling Stone Cover: Sexist, Pornographic, or What?
    • Bes: Are We the Women of Mad Men?
    • Lynne Spreen: Are We the Women of Mad Men?
    • Swannie: Rolling Stone Cover: Sexist, Pornographic, or What?
    • yttik: Rolling Stone Cover: Sexist, Pornographic, or What?

    The Latest from our Blog

    • Rolling Stone Cover: Sexist, Pornographic, or What?
    • Are We the Women of Mad Men?
    • How Feminists’ Eggs Came Home to Roost
    • Constructive Feminism and the Third Wave
    • Best City for Working Women: In Our Checkbooks

    Archives

    Blogroll

    • Afrocity
    • Amazing Women Rock
    • Conservatives4Palin
    • Elect Women Magazine
    • Equal Visibility Everywhere
    • Equal Writes
    • Femisex
    • Hardy Girls Healthy Women
    • Jack & Jill Politics
    • Jenn Q. Public
    • Marketing the Muse
    • MomsRising
    • NewsReal Blog (Feminist Hawks' Nest)
    • No Quarter USA
    • Peacocks and Lilies
    • Smart Girl Nation
    • Still4Hill
    • Stray Yellar Dawg
    • Taylor Marsh
    • Tennessee Guerilla Women
    • TexasDarlin
    • The Confluence
    • The Red Pump Project
    • The Stiletto
    • The Vyne
    • Uppity Woman
    • What About Our Daughters
    • WOMENomics

Find the New Agenda Online

  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Flickr

Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)

The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...

  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • Board of Directors
    • Welcome
    • FAQ’s
  • Media
    • Print & Internet
    • TV & Radio
    • Press Releases
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Past Events
    • Get Involved
    • Email Alerts
    • We Spoke Out!
    • Volunteer
  • Features
  • Blog
  • Become a Member
  • Donate
  • Contact Us