Gender gap in the NC Senate race

A couple weeks ago I talked to a reporter about the gender gap in the NC Senate race.  Before the interview I mentioned the upcoming interview to my Campaigns & Elections class and my students confirmed that the gender gap in the Hagan vs. Tillis race was uncommonly large– even compared to several other races with a Democratic woman running against a Republican man.   Today, I had a similar such request and while jogging (always do my best thinking then) I came up with what I think is a reasonable hypothesis for what’s going on here.  But first, behold the NC gender gap and be amazed (via the latest Elon poll):

Differences also arise by sex and race. Women offer higher levels of support (52%-33%) favoring Hagan, notably among the single and divorced, while men support Tillis (50%-38%) with the greatest level of support among those who are married.

So, these group differences do fit with what we typically find, but they are atypically large.  Anyway, the one big feature of this Senate race is how focused it is on education.  That’s just not an issue in most Senate races.  And it’s an issue where there is a clear gender gap.  Though I’ve not found any good data in a brief search, I strongly suspect that not only are women more liberal on education spending than are men (this we do know), but that women place more importance on the issue.  It is certainly possible that the unusual and intense focus on education in the NC Senate campaign could be a substantial driver of the unusually large gender gap.

This actually got me to thinking that it was perhaps a significant strategic error for the Republicans to nominate Tillis– the face of the General Assembly.  Had a member of the US House run (a very common stepping-stone for Senate candidates), it would have been much harder for Hagan to focus her campaign running against the unpopular policies of the NC GA.  Maybe I’m wrong, but I think Patrick McHenry would have probably been a much stronger candidate than Tillis (or anybody from the GA).  Anyway, I do think it has worked out to Hagan’s benefit.

Quick hits (part II)

1) 10 ways colleges can be not so financially nice to their students.

2) Speaking of college, some excellent do’s and don’t’s for effective studying.

3) It looks as if the hacked nude celebrity photos may be all about insecure security questions.

4) Great Radley Balko on how St. Louis county profits from poverty.  And Reihan Salam on how poverty has moved to the suburbs.

5) Here is one really, really weird animal.

6) Having a child is good for men’s careers; bad for women’s.  (Yes, with all the appropriate controls!) Bummer.

7) Not to say that this is the guy who set fire to my hotel last week, but as Kim said, many a Black male has been convicted on far less evidence.

8) I never watch baseball any more.  It’s just too boring.  And, it turns out that, empirically, it really has become more boring (i.e., more time for less offense).  And to think it is all because of strike zone cameras.  An obvious solution is to officially change the strike zone to what was being called before the cameras.  Alas, that won’t speed things up.

9) Nice essay on how humans are wired for negativity.

10) Tennis rackets through the times.  I remember switching from my wooden racket to a Jimmy Connors T-2000.  Before going fully graphite, I got a wood with graphite inlays.  And, ahh, for the good old days of my Wilson Sting.

11) Despite what their supporters say, NC school vouchers are definitely not about helping poor kids.

 

Where did all the teen moms go?

Loved this post from last week at Vox looking at the rather dramatic, and not well-understood, decline in the teen birthrate.  Sarah Kliff systematically explores each hypothesis and the evidence in favor and against.  Now that’s good stuff, damnit, and hard to imagine many places other than Vox where you’d find analysis like this.  First, the decline and why it’s a good thing:

For five years now, America’s teen birth rate has plummeted at an unprecedented rate, falling faster and faster. Between 2007 and 2013, the number of babies born to teens annually fell by 38.4 percent, according to research firm Demographic Intelligence. This drop occurred in tandem with steep declines in the abortion rate. That suggests that the drop isn’t the product of more teenagers terminating pregnancies. More simply, fewer girls are getting pregnant…

The massive decline in teen birth rates is undeniably good news for public health advocates. Teen mothers are significantly more likely to drop out of high school. Most teen mothers do not receive financial support from their child’s father; 48 percent live below the poverty line. Avoiding early motherhood undeniably opens additional doors in a teen’s future.

But there’s something uniquely frustrating about the recent, steep decline in teen birth rates: nobody knows why it’s happened.

So, why has the teen birth rate gone down so much?  Best guess is a perfect storm of a whole bunch of factors working in concert:

We may have just gotten lucky.

It’s not an especially scientific answer, but it’s one that seems to describe how teen pregnancy researchers view the dramatic slowdown in the birth rate: a collision of lots of trends that all serendipitously happened in the late 2000s and early 2010s.

The recession, the uptick in IUD use, a hit MTV show that deglamorized teen pregnancy — each of these factors could have have caused a small decline on their own. Taken together, it’s possible they caused a much bigger change.

And if that is the case, that doesn’t portend especially well for the fast decline continuing. A few of the factors might: use of IUDs, for example, might continue to rise as the health care law eliminates co-pays for the contraceptive. Cost has often been a barrier to IUD use, as co-pays could range between $500 and $1,000.

The other particulars, however, seem less likely to forecast long-term change. The economy is recovering, and so is the birth rate among older women — it’s possible that younger women could follow. Teen Momstopped airing in 2012  (a Teen Mom 2 series still does exist) and 16 and Pregnant, which wrapped up its fifth season this year, doesn’t deliver the blockbuster ratings it used to.

Researchers are waiting for the other shoe to drop: there’s a general expectation that at some point the statistics have to turn around. “A 10 percent decline per year is not something that happens forever,” said Levine. “I don’t know that it’s necessarily a bad thing if it goes back to the 2.5 percent declines we saw before.”

Anyway, good news for teens and public health, a a great example of Vox doing truly value-added journalism.

Also, Jon Cohn builds off the piece to make the point that free birth control is a really, really good thing (sorry, curmudgeonly conservatives):

Maybe this is a good time to remind everybody why this requirement [the contraceptive mandate] matters so much to those of us who support it. Many conservatives look at the price of oral contraceptives, available at places like Target or Walmart for as little as $9 a month, and wonder why anybody except the very poor would need help paying for it. But numerous studies have shown that even modest co-payments can reduce use of medications, particularly when you’re talking about less affluent people who must be careful with every dollar they spend. That’s the whole point of making certain drugs that prevent medical conditions cost-free. It works that way for diabetes and hypertension and, yes, it works that way for pregnancy. Besides, the most effective and, for some women, the most medically appropriate forms of birth control are intrauterine devices (IUDs). Those cost $500 or even $1000 out-of-pocket. Reducing their cost can have fairly dramatic effects on their usage, if the available research is correct…

Late last week, lots of people were talking about a story by Sarah Kliff, of Vox, on why teen pregnancy has been declining in just the last few years. It’s a great article, well worth your time, but the part that jumped out at me was the much bigger decline in teen births that occurred many decades agoin the 1960s, when the teen pregnancy rate fell by about 25 percent. What changed? The big factor, as social scientists (and friends of QED) Harold Pollack and Luke Shaeferreminded me over the weekend, was birth control. The Food and Drug Administration first approved the pill in 1960.

Birth control.  Good for the users.  Good for society.  Bad for conservatives who want to control women’s sexuality.

Quick hits (part I)

1) NPR on the power of peer groups in preventing campus rape.

2) Cool optical illusion.

3) Police shoot dogs all the time.  Just hope the police never come to your house looking for a criminal (Balko on the epidemic of shoot first, worry about whether the dog is a potential threat later).

4) Post editorial on the wrong-headedness of the Rick Perry prosecution.  DJC sent me a link suggesting that Perry will be convicted.  I just don’t see it happening.

5) Can taxing the wealthy strengthen democracy?  Probably yes:

The historical record, however, suggests that taxing the wealthiest does have an important, but different, consequence: making the wealthy vested in the common good. In fact, taxing the wealthy was crucial for the emergence of representative government itself.

6) George Will confirms Nixon’s attempts to sabotage peace in Vietnam in order harm LBJ and HH.  Nixon may have done some good things as president, but he was an absolutely abominable human being who would do anything to achieve and protect power.   Or so it was made pretty damn clear to me watching the new HBO documentary on the Nixon tapes.

7) Interesting libertarian piece by Mike Munger on government by unicorn.  Raises good points, to which I say I’ll still take government by horribly fallible humans over the alternative.

8) People in rich counties disproportionately search google about tech stuff (and boy do they love Canon cameras).  In poor counties it’s all about diabetes.  And hell.

9) John Oliver with his typically brilliant job on police militarization.

10) Interesting essay by Lev Grossman on how he struggles as a writer until he started writing fantasy.  I’ve been meaning to read The Magicians for a while.  Will try to do so soon unless some of you tell me otherwise.

11) Dahlia Lithwick on how the police in Ferguson have run roughshod over all sorts of Bill of Rights protections.

12) Lenore Skenazy on helicopter parenting run amok and how today’s parents want to criminalize the behavior that was the parenting approach of their own parents.

13) Fascinating study of why some people, but not others, in a near-death experience (a plane crash) develop PTSD.   I’ve always been a very psychologically stable person, but I’ve never really been pushed.  I’ve always wondered how I would respond to something like this or being in a war zone.  Of course, I hope I never have to find out.

14) That toddler injured by the flash-bang grenade thrown it its crib during a no-knock warrant search?  The county does not think it needs to pay for his medical bills.  Is this America or Russia damnit?!

15) Turns out breakfast is not the most important meal of the day after all.  Maybe.  I actually never ate breakfast at all until I got married and then started eating it every day just because Kim was.  I cannot imagine not doing so now (though sounds like not a bad way to save some calories, actually).

 

Women’s political ambition (or lack thereof)

I must say I hated the title of this Wonkblog post “Everything you think you know about women and politics is wrong.”  Really?  Time to revise my entire Gender & Politics syllabus, I suppose.  Alright, most readers don’t teach that class, but still, way too click-baity.

That said, a nice report on some interesting findings on women and political ambition.   What many people do not realize (which is not the same as being wrong) is that, across the board, women have substantially less ambition for political office than men.  And that, far more than anything else, accounts for the lack of women in political office.  The latest research from Jennifer Lawless (the ultimate guru of women and political office) shows that this is not at all about differences related to parenthood.  The gap between child-less women and men is pretty much the same as the gap between women and men with children.  Here’s the key chart:

So, what’s behind the lack of ambition.  Short version… men are overconfident, women are underconfident.  I suspect this difference extends well beyond politics.  Here’s the longer version from Lawless:

STP: How do you explain the disparity in terms of ambition and confidence about running for office. Is it that men think they are all that, and women don’t?

Lawless: Men overestimate and women underestimate. Men look around and see that lots of people come in all different shapes and sizes. But, for women, to the extent that you don’t fit the mold of say, Hillary Rodham Clinton or Sarah Palin, there is greater opportunity for self doubt. Although there is no female bias on Election Day — voters are just as willing to vote for women as men — but that is not the perception, so the women and men thought there was a perceived bias. Women think that they have to be twice as good to get twice as far. The women who are saying that they aren’t qualified are making assumptions based on wrong information, but information that happens to be the conventional wisdom. So getting out the message that people will vote for women is important.

I’m actually quite surprised that there’s basically no impact of family structure or responsibilities.  Personally, the idea of undertaking a grueling political campaign while also trying to do my part in caring for my children seems insane to me.  I’m too lazy to do it when the kids are grown, but it certainly seems more plausible.  Apparently, I’m unusual in thinking that way.  A good friend  is currently running for NC State Senate and her two children are under 5.  At a recent lunch she joked, but seriously, about hardly seeing her kids at all during the week (she’s also holding down a job).  More power to her for making the personal sacrifice because she really wants better for this state, but I am honestly surprised that raising children does not have more impact on political ambition.

 

 

Quick hits (part II)

1) Parenting habits from around the world that have not caught on in the US.  I love the non paranoia parenting of the Danish and Japanese.

2)  I truly believe the horrible-ness (especially the fundraising) keeps many very good people from running for political office (all the more reason I’m impressed my friend Sarah Crawford is doing it anyway).

3) FIFA is planning on having the women’s World Cup played on artificial turf.  So wrong.  And such an insult to women athletes.

4) Loved this Slate piece on the evolution of the SEC logo (and the bigger story of letters in circle logos).

5) From what I’ve read so far, I find the indictment of Rick Perry utterly ridiculous.  I suspect most of the liberals happy about this have their liberal blinders one.  Within a very wide latitude, politics should not be criminalized.

6) Loved this story on African Wild Dogs (apparently, they are almost the honeybees of the mammal world in terms of their level of social evolution).

7) Among all the wrongness of the Ferguson police, directly attacking the media is about as bad as it gets.

8) Don’t ask your kids what to do.  Tell them what to do.  (Of course, I need to make sure they actually do what I tell them).

9) No, arming the Syrian rebels would not have stopped ISIS.

10) Great Krugman column on the libertarian fantasy.  (Think “Toledo water).;

11) There’s a pretty easy technological solution to dramatically reduce police brutality.  And false charges of police brutality.  Police should wear video cameras.  It has worked great in once city.

12) The Upshot on the rise of pizza.  Hooray– certainly has made my life better.

13) Emily Bazelon on the police and race.

Quick hits (part I)

Another multi quick-hits weekend.  Enjoy.

1) Pope Francis’ list of tips for becoming a happier person.  Not bad.

2) Five myths about the border crisis.  Myth #1:

1. U.S. immigration policy is to blame for the surge of unaccompanied minors.

3) Hit the reset button on your brain?

Every status update you read on Facebook, every tweet or text message you get from a friend, is competing for resources in your brain with important things like whether to put your savings in stocks or bonds, where you left your passport or how best to reconcile with a close friend you just had an argument with.

If you want to be more productive and creative, and to have more energy, the science dictates that you should partition your day into project periods. Your social networking should be done during a designated time, not as constant interruptions to your day.

Nope, don’t see this happening for me.

4) Speaking of which… fascinating experiment of what happens when a reporter literally “likes” every single post on FB.

5) A happy marriage without children.  Well, of course.  But you damn sure better really like your spouse.

6) Of course, if you do have kids, don’t go to prison.  Our inhumane system will make it absurdly expensive and difficult to stay in touch with them.

7) Also, careful with getting yourself on the sex offender registry.  Even the parent who helped initially push it says it is way over-used now.

8) Was a decrease in testosterone among early human males responsible for eventually leading to civilization?  Makes sense to me.  And some science to support the idea.

9) States with stand your ground laws have more homicides.  I’m shocked.  Shocked.

10) I’m often amazed at how my students’ typos just seem to jump off the page at me whereas my own remain virtually invisible.  Here’s the science behind why this is.  I strongly encourage my students to have a friend read their paper for this reason.  Quite clearly, few actually do (or they have lame friends).  While I’m at… many of them really need to be a lot more careful with their use of the thesaurus.  I don’t have any examples quite this extreme, but my students are using words they don’t actually understand all the time.

11) Great TNR piece from Jason Zengerle about how Civil Rights are going backwards in Alabama.

12)  Veal farmers are adopting more human methods.  On the downside for veal lovers (I never eat it), this apparently means it tastes less like veal and more like regular beef.

13) The Post has a piece on NC Senator Kay Hagan looking to benefit from the backlash against the Republican-led legislature.  I’ve already seen several ads on this theme.

14) Cool study shows that reading about discrimination against “Mudbloods” in Harry Potter can help make kids more tolerant.  Awesome.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 528 other followers

%d bloggers like this: