Women's rights movement debates electoral strategy

Scan page 6

CAROLE An important discussion is taking place in the feminist movement: Can feminists advance women's rights in the electoral arena and, if so—how?

In California, the discussion takes the form of a debate over whether or not to endorse Dianne Feinstein, who is running for governor in the Democratic Party primary. Feinstein is promoting her candidacy among women's organizations on the basis of being a woman and her new-found support for the pro-choice cause.

Of course, feminists in the National Organization for Women (NOW) and other groups-particularly those in San Francisco, where Feinstein was the mayor-are all too familiar with Feinstein's actual record in office.

In a recent meeting in San Francisco held to discuss the Feinstein candidacy, NOW members exposed her dismal record. Feinstein, they pointed out, opposed San Francisco's comparable-worth settlements to increase the pay of women workers, vetoed a pro-choice resolution, gave financial support to an anti-choice candidate, played a leadership role in defeating a ballot proposition that would have expanded public childcare centers, fired people serving on the Commission on the Status of Women when they didn't toe her line, and more.

Those activists who sought NOW's endorsement of Feinstein argued that it's necessary to support women over men in elections because women are bound to be more supportive of at least some women's issues in the halls of government.

But the tactic of promoting women candidates just because they are women without regard for their record on the issues is not very appealing. While it's apparent that the men who run the government do not represent women at all, they clearly do not represent most men either.

In fact, the only segment of the population fully represented by the Democrats and Republicans are the super-rich—who seek to preserve their power and privileges at the ex6 SOCIALIST ACTION pense of the rest of us.

The women's movement has made great strides in winning the support of working-class men. After all, working-class men have an interest in women obtaining their full rights. When some people (such as women or Black people) earn lower wages based on their sex or race, this just drives all wages down.

An electoral blind alley One proponent of the idea that women candidates should "get extra points" is Eleanor Smeal, former president of the National Organization for Women. Smeal's role in NOW was to steer the organization into electoral politics, especially toward the Democratic Party.

Today, Smeal and current NOW President Molly Yard claim to advocate "independence" for the women's movement in the electoral arena. They've even promoted the idea of NOW helping to form an independent political party at some future time, and they set up a commission to explore this project.

At the NOW national conference last July, the idea of an independent party was discussed and embraced by enthusiastic delegates who were sick and tired of the betrayals by Democratic politicians. Since that time, however, the whole concept of independent political action has been reshaped and distorted by the NOW leadership.

Today Yard and Smeal propose that NOW endorse candidates for public office regardless of their political affiliation. Whether the candidates are Democrats or Republicans, endorsement would be based on their commitment to the pro-choice position on abortion. Even a watered-down, half-way pro-choice position (such as the position held by Virgina Governor Douglas Wilder) is sufficient grounds for endorsement, say the NOW MARCH 1990 leaders.

While this moves NOW out of the Democratic Party's back-pocket to some small extent, it is a far cry from "independence." All it means in real life is that, if none of the Democrats in contention claim to be pro-choice, NOW will endorse an occasional Republican.

For mass action!

The voters themselves have a deeper understanding of the two-party political shell game than the NOW leadership. Opinion polls and the high abstention on election day reveal that more and more Americans have come to believe that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can offer a solution to the pressing problems of the day-such as homelessness, poverty, racism, the poisoning of the environment, and a government at war against women's fundamental rights.

The women's rights movement needs a strategy of mass action to combat sexism, not a strategy of promoting candidates from either of the two parties of sexism and racism. We must keep our movement in the streets.

The movement already represents the opinion of the majority of Americans. We have the ability to mobilize millions of people in protest rallies, marches, and teach-ins. Through these activities, we can educate and attract millions more who may be undecided on the full range of women's rights issues. Finally, we have the ability to effectively defend the abortion clinics against right-wing thugs.

No politician will win our rights for us. During the Vietnam War, likewise, it was not the election of so-called peace candidates that forced the U.S. government to pull out, but the ever-growing mass movement in the streets (combined, of course, with the unrelenting resistance of the Vietnamese people).

Until it becomes possible to build a truly independent political party, a mass workers' party, it behooves the women's rights movement to jealously guard its independence and to deny any candidates of the Republican or Democratic parties the support they want so much to have.

A series of pro-choice events took place in cities and towns across Canada on Feb. 12. Included was a rally at the Toronto City Hall at which 25 to 30 Campaign Life supporters attempted to drown out the speakers throughout the event.

Following the rally, 800 pro-choice supporters gathered to march. As they passed the Conservative Party headquarters, an anti-choice disrupter unfurled a banner. Cops who had taken no action against the anti-choice goons tried to arrest a demonstrator who had removed this banner. As she disappeared into the crowd, the cops attacked the marchers with their billy clubs and arrested two demonstrators.

The annual International Women's Day demonstration in Toronto will be March 3. The theme is "Stop the Attacks-No Going Back!" There are four demands: No to Racism and Police Violence, No New Abortion Law, No to the GST (Goods and Services Tax) and Social Cutbacks, and No to Violence Against Women.

Plans are also underway for actions across Quebec and English Canada on May 12 to commemorate the 1970 crosscountry caravan to Ottawa and to signify that the battle for full reproductive rights continues.

----- pull-quotes -----

Canada pro-choice activists mobilize