Meg Whitman & the “Undocumented Worker” Charge
September 30, 2010
by Anna Belle Pfau
|
Nicky Diaz Santillan and Gloria Allred at their press conference Wednesday, September 29, 2010.
Oh, good grief, here we go. It’s Nannygate all over again. Meg Whitman, gubernatorial candidate for California, was hit with charges of employing an “undocumented worker,” her former housekeeper “Nicky” Diaz Santillan, from 2000 to 2009. The story, first reported on the entertainment website TMZ.com, has been picked up by the mainstream media, which is salivating already, its greasy chops fairly dripping with power verbs like “rocked” and with gratuitous adjectives like “explosive.” At this stage of the game it’s bound to be the kind of typical trick both sides tend to employ against each other as elections draw near, but I think a subtle sexism is at play too. Let me explain.
As Irin Carmon at Jezebel notes, such scandals were once upon a time usually leveled against female politicians, but that’s not exactly true anymore:
So-called “nanny scandals” are usually the provenance of female politicians, although thanks to the likes of Bernard Kerik that’s no longer exclusively true. They sit at the crossroads of seemingly endless culture-war issues: immigration, class, employee rights, and implicit judgment of working moms.
While I agree overall with this analysis, it doesn’t mean that the sexist nature of these kinds of attacks has magically disappeared. Fairer does not mean fair.
Sexism does not always lie in the cause of an action; sometimes it manifests itself in the effect. Thus charges of employing an undocumented worker may be a sexist slur, not because of the charge itself, but because of the effect. Male and female politicians may be accused of employing undocumented workers frequently, but the effect on their careers, as well as the details of the charges themselves, point to a double standard.
With few exceptions such charges against female politicians spell the end of that opportunity (and thus that particular career trajectory); such charges rarely have that effect on male politicians. Female politicians are generally accused of hiring illegal nannies and housekeepers, while men tend to be accused of hiring illegal landscapers or construction workers. Finally, the media treatment of men and women who have hired undocumented workers suggests a bias as well. It’s a much bigger deal if the politician is female.
Look at Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, or Tim Geithner. Romney was accused of using undocumented workers to service his lawn; Tancredo was accused of hiring a largely undocumented construction crew to renovate his basement; Geithner was accused of employing an undocumented housekeeper. Two years later, Mitt Romney was a favorite for the Republican nomination for president in 2008, and it looks like he’s shaping up to be a favorite again going into the 2012 election. Tom Tancredo, on a third-party ticket no less, is currently outperforming the Republican candidate in Colorado’s gubernatorial race. And, of course, Geithner is currently President Obama’s Treasury secretary, easily being confirmed in the midst of both tax and undocumented worker scandals. At the time, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid referred to Geithner’s tax and undocumented worker problems as “a few little hiccups.”
What a difference a few years make, especially if you’re a guy. Linda Chavez didn’t have it so easy in 2001; her confirmation process was stalled after it was learned she once had an undocumented women live with her, to whom she gave money and asked to performed chores. Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood, both of whom employed undocumented nannies, lost their opportunity to be confirmed as the first female Attorney General of the United States during the Clinton administration.
Of the six cases cited above, the charge of “hiring undocumented worker(s)” was a political career-ending one for women; not so much for men.
But let’s be clear: Meg Whitman doesn’t need my help in this matter. She’s got this. Her campaign has handled the media beautifully so far. She identified it early as a politically-timed ploy, then followed up with frank discussions about what happened, and expressed emotional sympathy for Santillan. The facts speak for themselves in this case, and the facts are that Santillan provided Whitman with false documentation that satisfied federal I-9 reporting requirements (copies of which Whitman produced), and upon Santillan’s confession to the Whitman family last year, she was dismissed. The law doesn’t ask for more than that from anyone, regardless of gender.
I’m still speaking out because after 20 years of political participation and activism, I know how the media works. I know that even though they didn’t care that Craig Miller confessed to having hired undocumented workers in a debate just two months ago, they will go hog-wild over this case. They already are. It’s front paged on Huffpo and Memeorandum as I write this, which means the story is making its way up through the ranks of media, moving from a merely exploitainment website like TMZ to somewhat more legitimate partisan news sites. It’s already been on CNN. I expect we’ll be reading about in the New York Times by the time this article goes to print at 7 a.m.
In fact, it’s the media that’s driving the tone of the debate, though in truth they’re being led by Gloria Allred, a self-described “feminist lawyer,” who is representing Nicky Diaz Santillan. Once upon a time Allred had serious credibility in feminist circles. Two parts legal-eagle, one part performance artist, she’s been known to release a plague of frogs at one senator’s press conference, and once stormed the Friars Club sauna in a swimsuit and, clutching a tape measure, sang Peggy Lee’s “Is That All There Is.” She was the only (and first) female member at the time. Lately she seems to have turned on women, such as when she litigiously disagreed with Nadya Suleman’s choices. Now she’s pulled this stunt with Santillan, risking that poor woman’s freedom and legal record to score a punch against the woman working to be California’s first female governor.
And the media is following along, citing Santillan’s teary-eyed claims of being “exploited, disrespected, humiliated and emotionally and financially abused” by Whitman, and that she was “treated like garbage.” Using language like this portrays Whitman as a stingy, emotionless privileged bitch. In political circles this is the feminine equivalent of demasculation, a kind of de-feminizing of a woman, so that she becomes so unlike what we expect of females that a latent repulsion is provoked in those susceptible to it. Just ask Liberal Dude Nation if that strategy works. Santillan may not know about this dynamic, but Allred certainly does. So do the media outlets pushing this story so far.
As I said earlier, the facts speak for themselves. By Santillan’s own admission, she was paid $23 an hour, which hardly amounts to economic exploitation. We’ll have to wait on the details of the rest of the case Allred is bringing against Whitman. We shouldn’t discount it before we’ve heard the details. But Whitman’s version of the story seems to be resonating, and if she manages to come through this unscathed—and I think she will—she may set a precedent for how to fight this kind of media and cultural bias without mentioning sexism. We need that kind of strategy in the toolbox. This is definitely one to watch.
California voters should run Brown out of town for this. Can’t win on issues, so use this woman and “stage” this type of thing. This is truly despicable!
Brava Amy!
“Sexism does not always lie in the cause of an action; sometimes it manifests itself in the effect.”
Exactly. Well done.
From Wall Street Journal:
Ms. Allfred has raised allegations against a GOP candidate in a California race. One day before the state’s recall election in 2003, Ms. Allfred came forward with a woman who claimed she was groped by Arnold Schwarzenegger. He dismissed the claim as a political tactic and won the seat.
Did we ever hear the veracity of that claim?
great analysis, Amy. we need to be ready for comments when this story goes around.
Jerry Brown as seasoned politician applies all tricks and there are so many against a female candidate. he being competitive is just a shame.
how are we ending the double standard employed. male politicians with a financial war chest are considered positive figures. a lot of money on women by itself defeminizes them. if the story of the undocumented worker does not pan out, it is just distorted. she obviously has not employed “truth squats” like another politician.
isn’t this election about jobs and jobs and jobs. so who has created more jobs than Meg Whitman. Are the democrats going to spurn ebay for not asking for citizenship identification.
thanks Amy for this story.
Thank Anna Belle – she wrote it!
mea culpa, I missed that Anna Belle wrote this great piece. thanks Anna Belle.
Business as usual. Start a catfight, and then sit back and watch the menz benefit from it. When will women ever wise up to this?
Glad this piece is resonating. It was ridiculous on the face of it, so transparent. I’m so glad Whitman was ready. She has put the kibosh on this fast, and it has all but disappeared from serious headlines this morning. I like to think the tone we’re setting helped. The media now expects to be called out when they go along with these underhanded attempts at provoking latent sexism in the culture.
Couldn’t agree more about the catfight, Janis. I almost put that in the title. It’s going to backfire. Hispanics have been targeted by this campiagn (in addition to LDN and the bailing white women who used to support them) and now they know Whitman paid an undocumented worker $23 an hour. That’s generous pay for someone who is being painted as rich and stingy by the stale and stupid Brown campaign.
Brown’s campiagn had to know about the disparate effect on men and women when they employed this disgusting trick, and we can now say with certainty that Brown uses sexism to attempt to win campaigns. Just like plenty of other Democrats. I’ll continue to tar and feather them with the label of sexism as long as they continue to employ it.
Janis, honestly, I’m not interested in waiting for women to wisen up. They want to keep their boy babies; are they going to wisen up to this? No. We don’t have to wait.
Excellent article, good points! Thanks for reminding me about Geithner, Romney, and Tancredo. I’d forgotten all about them because obviously there’s an incredible double standard.
Whitman fires back!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201.....ousekeeper
She is responding, but now Allred is trying the Geraldine Ferraro treatment of tarring Whitman with her husband’s alleged actions (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201.....ousekeeper).
She should know better. I hope some enterprising CA journalist or GOP operative is sniffing out the communication between Allred and Brown. If they can show collusion, they can nail him to the wall. It needs to happen before this next (Spanish-speaking) debate, if possible. Turn the tables and put those two in bed together.
“Female politicians are generally accused of hiring illegal nannies and housekeepers, while men tend to be accused of hiring illegal landscapers or construction workers.”
Well, that’s the real difference; all women are responsible for housework and childcare, but not all men are responsible for landscaping and construction, because men are individuals with distinct personalities and talents who may or may not be suited to a particular kind of work. The issue is clearly not the immigration status of the workers (even though it is a serious issue), it’s whether or not hiring the workers allows a person to escape his or her — oh, who am I kidding, her — natural responsibilities.
Is Allred just crazy or is she eyeing for some appointment.
it makes no sense to put the former employee through this media circus. she is not allowed to answer questions, but exposed and will have immigration on her heels.
Allred’s actions are so anti women. desperate for what?
read in some poll that hispanic voters tend towards democrats. the ploy in the days before the debate on all hispanic channels is so obvious. Anna Belle I also hope they find the GOP can nail the Brown Allred connection.
The allegation made by my Allred against Arnold was proven false. Today Gloriua showed a copy of the letter from Social Security in which Whitman’s husband simply told Nicky( the $23.00 per hour so called exploited illegal alien) to handle it.To me( and I am for Meg so perhaps I am biased) this is simply evidence of an employer who believed Nicky was legal. Meg’s husband believing the maid was legal told her to handle it( ie contact social security with the correct info etc) All day long I wrote on letters directing people to respond to various correspondence…that is called delegating…and frankly unless I had further contact with the issue probably couldn’t recall having seen it either
This house keeper is here in the US and was being paid $23 an hour. If Meg Whitman knew she was illegal I guarantee she would have been paying her much less, if she were ever inclined to knowingly hire an illegal alien to work for her. I watched the coverage of this story by the lame stream liberal media and it was ridiculously missleading; no surprise. Fox News had all copies of the documents (1090, drivers license etc.) that were supplied to the Whitman’s by the service that placed this criminal-house keeper with the Whitmans. The house keeper is guilty of fraud and entering this country illegally; just the kind of folks the democrap party loves. If George Soros has his way our country will be full of Nicky Diazs for the dems and SEIU to exploit.
Meg Whitman should find some of the parents of the young members of Rev. Jim Jone’s People’s Temple-who was beloved by Jerry Brown along with other liberals at the time in Crazyfornia. Let them tell their stories of how their pleads with government officials to get their kids out of this cult fell on the death ears of Brown and others.
I must confess I once voted for Jerry Brown in a democrat presidential primary after Tsongas fell ill and dropped out. God forgive me for ever having been a democrat!
Bruce
I agree with you. And people who hire illegas do it so they can pay them less than they would pay legal workers. $23 an hour is the going rate for a house keeper so it is plain to see that the Whitman’s were deceived by Nicky Diaz.
Just listened to the Allred interview with Mark Levin. On it Allred contends that her firm is an employment law firm and that the maid came to her because she was owed overtime and some mileage.andthat is what the controversy is all about..nothing political at all. Hogwash said Mark. You do not hold a large scale press conference over a labor standards dispute.The lady was paid $23.00 hardly exploitive. But assuming the maid kept a contemporaneous diary of the hours she worked, how many overtime hours is she claiming? 1000? if so the case is worth about $12,000.00. Hardly press conference worthy and a sum Meg could pay in a heartbeat. Yet Allred contends that the timing of the case was purely coincidental and not politically motivated.The conference wasnt to help Brown against Meg she says. Most lawyers send demand letters not hold spectacles. Clearly Allred is a liar and her intents were other than what she told Levin.
Why is it that so called liberal feminists hate conservative women more than anything else. Why is Allred out to sandbag the first woman governor of California in favor of a tired career hack?
This just wreaks of political intent on Allred’s side.
I hope the points that individuals in Calif. who are on the fence about either candidate realize that:
1. Employers are “by law” not supposed to hire illegals.
2. Employers are not “by law” required to turn them in to authorities if they find out they are indeed illegal. They just are required to terminate their employment.
3. Whitman didn’t want her ex-employee to suffer at the hands of immigration because she had COMPASSION for this woman even though her hands were tied regarding this woman’s employment. She obviously wanted her ex-employee to do the right thing and take personal responsibility for being an illegal.
What Whitman did was the right thing both legally and ethically. She is not a hypocrite, she followed the law as it is presented today, imo.
I’m a Democrat who happens to like both Allred and Whitman, and I think this whole issue is a red herring. I have never and will never understand how this has an impact on how someone will govern. (I feel the same way about affairs, to be honest)…and it dosen’t matter to me what side of the aisle when it comes to these types of issues. It also seems clear to me that Whitman did what she was supposed to do and didn’t cover anything up. Rome is burning (including California) and yet we continue to let these distractions, and yes, to me they are, derail political candidates.
I just saw a copy of the so Allred evidence. The Social Security letter clearly states that is is not evidence that the person is illegal and is clear from reading the boilerplate on the letter that the employer should not take punitive measures against the employee simply on the basis of the letter. Meg’s husband states that it was common for him to delegate by writing notes on them and he assumed Nicky took care of the problem after he asked her to. He also noted that he and Meg paid all employer taxes on Nicky did w2 witholding and remitted same to the IRS etc
Bruce
Why is it that so called liberal feminists hate conservative women more than anything else?
————————————————–
My quess would be it’s because conservative women are happy and these Obama stepford wives who call themselves feminists are ve very unhappy.
I’d love a link to the evidecne, Bruce, if you can copy and paste it. Here’s a link to the SFG’s (hardly conservative-friendly) findings, which are that Whitman did nothing wrong.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....1FME32.DTL
That should end it, but of course it won’t. Brown has too much to gain by provoking sexism in young Democratic men, racial paranoia in the Hispanic community, as well as stoking the class wars with this. I can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party has turned into: the party of fear and hate. So much for hope and change.
Annabelle it was on the foxnews.com site, also at greta van sustrenes site which i think is gretawire.com. Greta took on Allred last night in a marvelous coup de gras. If you can find that clip at greta wire everyone it is awesome
greta’site is found within the foxnews.com site and is
http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com
Juliette, I would have to disagree. I would say that conservative feminists hate liberal feminists right back just as bad.
Which is the problem. There is no male opponent that ANY woman hates as much as she hates the woman opponent from the other tribe. And it can be ANY other tribe. If I’m a Republican woman, I hate a Democrat women more than ANY man, no matter what he did. Same for Democratic women. Same for liberal or conservative women of either stripe.
The real problem is that it doesn’t stop there. A fat or thin woman hates a thin or fat woman. A black or white woman hates a white or black woman. An old or young woman hates a young or old woman, lesbian or straight hates straight or lesbian. This is not the exclusive bailiwick of ANY one kind of woman, and we ALL are in “the wrong tribe” to ANY woman. The woman whose tribe I share politically will be happy to attack me when the time comes because I am in the other tribe ethnically or generationally.
These are constant shifting sands, where the borders are drawn and redrawn at will when ANY woman is expected to support ANY OTHER woman.
I expect conservative women to be no more welcoming to their liberal sisters than liberals were to them, and so on and so on down the line, down the centuries, while fellating the men in their own clan and ignoring the men in the other clan. Yeah, they offended you once twenty years ago. And your kind offended them once forty years ago, and so it goes.
It will never stop until we make it stop, and the patriarchy meanwhile relaxes into its recliner and eats its cutlet in peace.
But by all means, keep on going. Keep playing the game. We haven’t stopped since we evolved down out of the trees, so why stop now?
Janis,
I totally agree.
However, it was Hillary supporters who came to Palin’s defense during the GE. Sadly, I don’t see republican women coming to the aid of Hillary.
Funny thing. When it was Hillary being attacked with vitrolic misogynistic spew, the likes of Hannity and O’Reilly NEVER commented on it like they do when it’s a republican candidate being attacked.
It appears that democratic women are more inclined to defend a republican woman running for office but it’s not reciprocated when it’s a democratic woman. I explained this to my republican women friends, who were thrilled that the dem women stood up for Palin, but they could not bring themselves to offer the same commitment to Hillary or some other dem woman.
That is the kind of attitude that women must overcome if we ever want to make the kinds of changes debated here having to do with equality with men.
I think that the Hillary supporters were stinging worse due to having had the election stolen out from under us right under our noses and with the full complicity of a global media.
Nevertheless, your point is very well-taken. We — and wen I say “we” I mean WOMEN of all political stripes and every tribe — need to get past this, now. Or else we give up, go back home, and resign ourselves to being the world’s buttwipers for the next thousand years, just as we’ve been for the last couple thou.
If you are a liberal woman who thinks it’s an edgy, postmodern feminist statement to call Palin a trailer-trash cunt, or if you are a conservative woman who hates that “career bitch” Hillary because she couldn’t keep her mayun on the straight and narrow, then shut up, go butt-up, and get two paces behind your man, because that’s where you’re headed. That’s where we’re all headed if we don’t show some fucking solidarity for ONCE.
just saw an interview on gretawire with Gloria Allred referring to Niki the housekeeper as “Rosa Parks”.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/.....t_id=26925
I never liked Alred before. her appearance with the million voices march in Denver seemed aimless, chaotically planned and wasteful, I never got the sense that she was pro Hillary; I believe she had a hungerstrike for the ERA. without a group, a plan, a movement it will and did not get attention. this time nannygate will likely hurt her client and maybe derail another competent woman’s career. the comparison with Rosa Parks is insane. Rosa Parks who descended from people forcefully brought to the country, not paid a decent wage and segregated out of society. how could she possibly serve as equal to nannygate?
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am
February 17, 2012 at 2:39 pm
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
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...