The New Agenda Speaks Out on Hillary’s Successor
December 1, 2008
by The New Agenda
|
Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand
Rep. Caroline Maloney
Today we issued a press release titled The New Agenda Calls on Governor Paterson to Make History. In our press release, we list a number of qualified women that are ready and able to fill Sen. Clinton’s slot. We note that, including Sen. Clinton, only 17 of the 100 U.S. Senators are women.
Wouldn’t it be a travesty to see that number go down as a result of Sen. Clinton moving up!
Co-founder Amy Siskind said:
Women will no longer be a sleeping majority. In 2001, Hillary Clinton was elected the first woman to serve the people of New York as a U.S. Senator. If Clinton’s seat opens it should be filled by another woman. We are calling for parity in government at all levels.
Co-founder Elaine Lafferty added:
Recent polls show that a majority of American women are disappointed about how women fared in the election. Gov. Paterson has an opportunity to marry hope and history in New York by appointing a qualified woman to carry on Hillary Clinton’s legacy.
Here’s our list of qualified women who could capably step into Sen Clinton’s slot:
• Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney
• Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand
• Congresswoman Nita Lowey
• Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy
• Congresswoman Yvette Clarke
• Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez
• Congresswoman Louise McIntosh Slaughter
• Caroline Kennedy
• City Council Speaker Christine Quinn
• Former President, Morgan Stanley, Zoe Cruz
• Former Citigroup, Inc. executive Sallie Krawcheck
You can contact Gov. Paterson at 518-474-8390 or email him at his website.
Madamab is also circulating a petition in support of Rep. Maloney.
Thanks, New Agenda!
Thank you!!!
This is a tough one. I love the idea of this being a great platform to put our money where our mouth is as far as being non-partisan by suggesting Republican women. At the same time, one cou argue that Clinton’s seat should be filled by a Democrat since Clinton is one and the Dems shouldn’t lose a seat because of her move (which, by the way, I don’t view as a move “up” necessarily; just a move). So, I actually think this seat should be filled by a Democrat who’s a woman.
Meanwhile, thanks for being on top of this (and so many other things, many of which we likely don’t even know about because of all of the time and energy spent behind the scenes working tirelessly. Thanks to all at The New Agenda!
Thanks for this Amy. Great show tonight!
You only mentioned Democrats!? No Independents or Republican women would fit the bill?
Also, why would a U.S. Congresswoman want to jump to the Senator side? Do you think a Congresswoman is “beneath” a Senator? How sad.
I thought the “new agenda” included ALL WOMEN. I truly believe in my heart the advancement of women in politics is far more important than segregating women because of a “label”, or a party affiliation.
I know of a few Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Working Class, and even “Green” Women that can do a wonderful job as the U.S. Senator from NY.
Well, it was fun while it lasted.
Lincoln Cross, you make a good point about congresswomen, but of course a Dem should replace a Dem. Get real.
And as for “fun while it lasted” — since you’ve not been seen here before, my guess is there are a lot of trolls with eyes on this site, probably male, with their own rather dated agenda at keeping the status quo.
The New Agenda is doing great work…and will keep it up. But, nice try at implying otherwise!
Lincoln,
A reason why a representative might want to move to the senate might have something to do with the length of the term of office. Because a representative only has a two year term, a substantial part of that time he or she is running for re-election. With a six-year term a senator can spend more time getting things done. A friend of mine who moved from being a state representative to being our state senator said that she made the move because the senate is smaller, and there were more opportunities to establish the relationships needed to work well together.
Lincoln,
Obviously, a Governor will replace with someone from his or her own party. If you are genuinely interested in non-partisan work, you should start planning to find a viable Republican woman to challenge young Biden’s hereditary claim on the Delaware seat in 2010. If that does not interest you, there are many other seats up for election in 2010. There will be more than 450 for the U.S. Congress in total. Surely, there will be many opportunities for this group to support a woman candidate irrespective of her party affiliation.
I will absolutely not support Maloney. I am only willing to reach across the aisle and support ALL women when the woman I am reaching for is willing to do the same. I find this very disappointing.
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.co.....ne-at-all/
Taken from the post that Cynthia GA provided:
Congresswoman Maloney did credit Gov. Palin for her commitment to her family, and the public acceptance of a woman with small children in politics. But she added, “at the same time, she was not for women’s rights, women saw right through her and voted against her.”
I take this as dismissive of the millions of women who did vote for McCain – Palin. One of whom I know well and have a great deal of respect for. A woman who supports the published agenda of this group but believes that Governor Palin actually took more sexist abuse than Senator Clinton did.
Caroline Kennedy supported Obama (a man) against Hillary (a woman) in the primary.
How shallow. If the one doesn’t like my comment, I’m considered a “troll”, and to “get real”. Well, the last time I looked (which hasn’t been for years…and I’m not doing that again…lol) I have a vagina…makes me a woman…right?!
God, help the “female race”! But, being the Agnostic that I am, may I accurately state ” Women, help the female race.” We are the only race, the female race that is, that won’t support each other. How dare she have a different veiw!
The NAACP would not turn an American with African heritage away for their “VIEWS”…but the NOW organization and other women organizations would kick me out on my fanny, if I so disagreed.
Why don’t women have ONE PLACE (just ONE PLACE) to congregrate and share our thoughts on how to empower women, as a whole.
When and if women reach the same equalities and positions as men, in pay and power, the women will then see that the woman’s view, hopes and dreams are eerily similiar with other American women and even woman around this world.
But until then, tear and rip apart the woman you believe is adverse to other women.
Replace Hillary’s position with whomever…I don’t care..the real issue is getting a woman in Shmuck Shumer’s seat! Democrat, Republican, Green Party, Communist, doesn’t make a difference, as long as we keep the numbers going up for women.
If I’m the sole Republican woman in a auditorium of Democrat women, I’d be clapping the longest and loudest. To me, the uprising of the Woman, is far more important than any “label”.
I would like to weigh in here. The New Agenda is non-partisan – for example, we were the ONLY women’s rights group to speak out against the sexism aimed at Gov Palin.
The New Agenda will seek to promote women from ALL parties into office. The case of Sen Clinton’s pick is sightly different as the seat is currently held by a Democrat, therefore Gov Paterson will fill it with a Democrat.
In the future, you will see this organization continue to promote our platform of women’s rights issues to all parties.
You will also see, as in our press release on women in cabinet, that we will promote, where possible, women of all parties.
Before this nominating process, I was probably a narrow minded democrat. However, the sexism and the misogny was so blatant and it came mostly from my own party. What a shock!! In the beginning of the campaign many said ” it’s wonderful we have these two great candidates”, but I never felt that way. How could a man with a razor thin resume even compare to someone like Hillary. The main stream media never stopped shouting at her for every little thing, while allowing nearly everything he miscued on just roll off. I have judged everything by the way the media would judge it if Hillary did it. There is just no way she could have had a preacher like Rev. Wright or an acquaintence like
Bill Ayers.. He was calm and cool. She was cold and unemotional to a fault, except when she nearly cried……………….and so many of these attacks came from women. Why???? We, as women, do not understand how we are being sexist.
I began to view this election like it was an out of body experience after Hillary lost the nomination. I could not roll over for just any democrat. HE was not my choice. So I really didn’t have a dog in the fight. I began to look at this process very objectively for the first time in my life. When Sarah Palin came along it was so easy to see how badly she was attacked for everything and anything by the media, fellow democrats and yes by women. She was like a moving target. After all, she was a women. Some man tried to engage Hillary into attacking Ms. Palin. Hillary replied that she didn’t think that was what this campaign was about. It is sad that women do not recognize how petty they are attacking other women. I am so glad this discussion is happening, finally.
Speaking of shallow…John Horning and others had very good points to make to you Mr. Cross.
I take note of your continued complaining after dismissing this place.
We have plenty of women from both sides of the aisle making excellent points back and forth…but only one newcomer tearing down this place while ignoring that.
Sharon, I agree with you, except for this:
“Some man tried to engage Hillary into attacking Ms. Palin.”
omg! It was more than one man! It was the Obama campaign, which also sent out other female attack dogs, who complied with that role. It was also the media, which was salivating for that particular cat fight, to mix animal metaphors.
And they did almost manage to orchestrate it when they double booked Hillary and Sarah…where was it? The U.N.? At any rate, Hillary simply left and refused to comply.
Eventually, the Obama campaign followed her fine example, but the media has yet to let up.
Zee, call me a Mister, call me a poodle, it makes no difference to me. I clearly stated I was a female, if you choose it ignore this, I am perfectly fine with that too.
Call me a “newcomer”, whatever that means being that this site was only established about 3 months ago. Wouldn’t that kind of make you a “newcomber” too?
Guess what, if this organization want’s to succeed on the premise that it is inclusive to all, then a lot of “newcomers” will be still joining in droves if they believe in the message; men and women alike who believe in the advancment of women, of ALL women.
What I like about the “newcomer” is the unique viewpoint of each woman (and man). Initially, not to agree or disagree, but to listen and to understand her or his perspective then we can agree wholly or in part or not at all, all along giving her or him respect, because we all are entitled to our views.
I have read the other comments. And I do understand where they are coming from. Replace a democrat with a democrat, and that is the political way. I get that. However, when a gender (the woman) is the majority in this country, but is the minority in power, our thought patterns MUST CHANGE.
It is no more unreasonable to suggest we consider ALL women than it is to suggest the replacement of the senator should be of the same gender.
It is apparent in order to gain political power we need the numbers in congress, in both houses. Though it is not unreasonable to suggest some congresswomen for the senate position, it’s not a pratical move. To do so would only transfer political power and not INCREASE it because more than not the person to fill the seat in the House of Representative would probably be a man. Our goal should be to increase political power, not to simply transfer it, or reduce it.
Well . . . as long as her replacemnt is not married and therefore has no life so she can devote all of her waking hours to it. ( ! ) More on that crazy theme here
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI.....index.html
I would agree that a Democrat woman should fill the vacancy, even though I am mostly Republican when it comes to politics. So, let’s hope for equity. There is equity to be found at times, though rare. I note in the Jan. edition of the VFW magazine an article about the VFW’s National Military Services (pp. 26) and the picture shows 6 women staffers and 2 men. The assistant Director, Capt. Crystal Lauver, is currently in Iraq with an Engineer Company. Her picture was on the next page – she has her hand on the stock of her rifle, imagine that.
Irene,
I hope we will have some articles coming soon to address both the Rendell and the Maloney comments. What is wrong with these people this week? I have seen the Rendell comments excused in several places and the Maloney comments as well. I also thought it was counterproductive for Pelosi to say Hillary won’t face sexism in her new job.
”
Speaking at a Hunter College forum on the role of gender in politics, the Speaker downplayed the suggestion — put forth in the form of a question — that Clinton might face misogynistic obstacles on the world stage.
“None at all,” she replied, when asked if this would be the case.
”
I don’t get that because ignoring it is what has gotten us to this point. Of course Hillary will face sexism in countries where women are treated as less than cattle. What amazes me is that instead of telling Pelosi to quit pretending sexism doesn’t exist, this article just covers her **tt by the title completely misrepresenting what she said. How can you warn about something you said didn’t exist?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....47563.html
I just can’t believe Maloney can say with a straight face that Hillary suffered terrible sexism but Palin did not? Or worse really is that she seems to be implying that it was wrong when it happened to Hillary but justified when it happened to Palin because of something she believes to be lacking in McCain’s record? Here is part of what she said..
”
“For Hillary Clinton, the country came face to face with misogyny,” Maloney said. “She inspired despite the hurdles for her that weren’t there for her opponents…John McCain had a 23-year problem with women votes; Palin did nothing to help women’s rights. The American people can see the difference between someone there as a woman and someone with a record.”
”
I am returning Maloney’s book because I don’t believe she is intellectually honest and I’m not going to waste my money or time on it.
I really hope the New Agenda isn’t going to ignore what Maloney, Pelosi, and Rendell said this week.
goesh,
I saw that too. They are getting squared away!
Taken from the post that Cynthia GA provided:
Pelosi promised, “In the first weeks [of the new administration], we will pass the bill for insuring 10 million children in America right off the bat.” She told the enthusiastic New Yorkers that the Pay Equality Act would follow in the first few weeks as well as stem cell research legislation.
Well, one of these three is on TNA’s list of goals. Why do I get the feeling that, once this was said, the Progressives believe that they have already done what they are willing to do for the women of America?
Update: Nita Lowey has said that she has no interest in the position.
As for Maloney, I am still supporting her. But, my petition says any qualified woman would do, and I do not appreciate her comments regarding Sarah Palin. I think she was taking too partisan a line there without going deeper into Palin’s record.
Like many liberal women, Maloney refuses to admit that a woman can be pro-life AND a feminist. Ah well. No one is perfect.
madamab-
The problem is we are going to lose a lot of people here, myself included frankly, if we are going to give free passes to people some of us support politically for other reasons. If Chris Matthews (most of us think he is a waste of meat) had said the same things it would have been front page on this website. But it’s okay for Pelosi and Maloney because “no one is perfect?” That is what is so insidious about sexism and misogyny, we turn away and ignore it if it suits our political, social, or financial purposes but then scream and are outraged when it is directed at someone we “like.” I have done this in the past too but I won’t anymore. I thought that was the purpose of this group? To not let sexism hide in the shadows of ANY political party or media network?
Amen Cynthia GA…I like the way you think.
Until this cherry-picking, partisan line bs stops about women, we’re not going to get very far.
Another example is Gov Rendell comments about Janet Napolitano and her being “perfect” for the cabinet position of Secretary of Homeland Security. Check out this link. What amazes me is that NOW gives him a pass. Who are these women? This cherry-picking nonsense must stop.
http://kdka.com/video/?id=49768@kdka.dayport.com
Cynthia GA,
I hope that no one jumps ship this quickly. I also found these comments offensive and counterproductive from a TNA perspective. What I would like to see is some analysis of whether or not this Congresswoman actually supports the eight goals of TNA or not. If she is purely a “Progressive” who uses her gender for support without returning support then TNA should not sponsor her, in my opinion.
Thank you New Agenda!!
We are currently researching the women who are potential picks to replace Senator Clinton to best advocate on behalf of them with Governor Paterson. We are aware of the situation with Rep. Maloney and have members who have worked with Rep. Gillibrand. However, we are looking for information regarding all the other qualified women as well.
In addition, we are researching and reporting on the current situation regarding the NY Judicial Commission (which failed to nominate a single woman for consideration by Paterson for Chief Judge) and weighing options for the best actions to take to address this disgraceful development and step back for women.
Keep up the great work and again, thank you New Agenda!!!
Together, we can do this!!
For more information on these two candidates and the developing Judicial nominating issue, please visit us at our link.
http://www.hillarysvillage.net.....php?t=3106
http://www.hillarysvillage.net.....php?t=3020
“I hope that no one jumps ship this quickly…”
I would agree with John, Cynthia.
And Maloney is parroting the very attitude we’re trying to combat, but it is an attitude considered as natural as breathing. Whether she’s the pick or not, I would hope that one of our goals is to break through that narrow world-view. So, why wouldn’t we reach out and invite her to look at the New Agenda, whether or not she’s chosen? Why instantly dismiss her instead of reach out?
Has The New Agenda seen this? (h/t TN Guerilla Women)
http://www.reuters.com/article.....4920081203
Gov. Paterson is outraged he has to choose a chief judge from amongst 7 male candidates.
He says the system must be flawed! He gets it! Maybe he’s seen the New Agenda press release and agrees wholeheartedly?
If the New Agenda drafts a contact letter to Paterson, please let it include an approving nod to his acknowledgment that something is wrong with the system if it doesn’t promote qualified women.
Zee-
I would love it if we could reach out to her and get her to change her mind. I think we should try that with everyone until they demonstrate that they are unwilling or unable to see the hypocrisy and harm they are causing women as a whole. I just don’t like the way she is being given a pass and I don’t intend to support her unless she changes her mind. I will never agree with her politics, but I would have been willing to support her as a woman if she had been even-handed about acknowledging the sexism in this election. It was so egregious that I don’t understand why it can’t transcend politics?
Zee-
Your reuters article gave me a smile
Thanks for finding it!
Regarding Caroline Kennedy, the confluence had an interesting post aaddressed to Gov. Paterson:
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.....-caroline/
“You have an opportunity to earn some major mojo by appointing a woman who has *earned* that right through hard work and accomplishments. Appointing a woman because of who she is and not what she has done further undermines women in the eyes of the public. A woman’s accomplishments are always held to a higher standard than a man’s. Caroline Kennedy would send the worst kind of message about women in politics. Women will once again be beholden to male benefactors and not merit to get a seat at the table. Forget about Lady Caroline and appoint Carolyn or Kirsten.”
Cynthia, it is a partisan attitude, and believe me…it’s horrifying to witness when one’s own self (eg, me!) used to think progressives were the “reality-based” and conservatives the partisan. Partisans hold many beliefs as truth.
Even hearing that there might be another way of thinking will probably be rejected at first.
Look at it this way…child-rearing books usually warn parents that something has to be repeated at least 7 times for it to sink in.
It’s not just children…we don’t instantly learn without repetition, and conversely, ANYTHING repeated often enough is accepted, whether it’s true or not.
Thus, partisans and MSM repeat the hell out of anything they want their followers/listeners to accept.
We can do no less.
Cynthia…thank egalia, of TN Guerilla Women. She finds amazing news on women. Of course, I ran right over here to cross post it!
Zee-
I don’t have any children. My mother says that is why I never developed any patience.
I am not understanding how Carolyne Kennedy made it on your list. and ABC is already speculating about her.
Nonpartisan is fine with me, but CK has not only not supported Hillary, not shown in any way how she could possibly continue Hillary’s work. It shows bad taste to mention her for this position.
Despite her young age Karen Gillibrand is from upstate, has in one term already accomplished quite a bit and seems close to Hillary’s positions. She would be a terrific replacement.
I will never vote for City Council Speaker Christine Quinn again and here’s why. When Bloomberg decided to run for a third term he had term limits overturned by the City Council with Christine Quinn leading the charge. The City Council was term limited too so now she get’s to hang onto her job. I listened to as much of the limited public hearing as I could stand. After one of the council members explained that the two winning elections for term limits didn’t count because turnout was low my head exploded. Trickle down RBC and just as repulsive. FYI I voted against term limits but I was in the minority. A politician that so blatantly tosses out the results of not one but two elections shouldn’t hold office and I sure don’t want her as my senator. If there’s a difference between this and the disgusting DNC primary tactics I don’t see it.
I agree with the comments raising questions about Caroline Kennedy’s qualifications for the US Senate. She’s a lawyer who’s never practiced law, but more important she’s spent her entire adult life avoiding the general public she’s apparently seeking to represent.
but my concern over seeing Caroline Kennedy on NEWA’s list also raises questions about the list itself. I’m wondering if even a list of suggestions constitutes endorsement, which NEWA has said it will not do. true, a list doesn’t zero in on one candidate, but does it constitute a broader, more sweeping, quasi-seal of approval of every name on it?
I think a woman should be named to replace Senator Clinton, one who has been tested and earned the appointment. Most likely, whoever gets appointed will win the election in 2010. I think Carolyn Maloney has great credentials in Congress and experience. She’s paid her dues and is smart and knowledgable. Caroline Kennedy may be a politically advantageous pick but I don’t agree with her being handed the position without running for election first (like the rest have).
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
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...