WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS1 OANA BĂLUŢĂ
Abstract. The aim of the paper is to explain and support with electoral data the 8.5% increase in women’s descriptive representation in the 2016 legislative elections in Romania. The change in descriptive representation is even more challenging in a political context that is highly resistant to gender representation and gender quotas. My intention is to elaborate an argument grounded in a larger opportunity structure that opened doors for a better descriptive representation of women, although an unintended one. I begin with a critical reflection on literature and research addressing political representation in Romania and Central and Eastern Europe in order to strengthen that new avenues need to be embraced by scholars, avenues that both question the adequacy of explanation patterns and later on operationalize in specific contexts the findings of better researched countries. Then I offer a descriptive depiction of data from the 2017 parliamentary elections to explain the 8.5% increase in descriptive representation. The data used is based on results published by the electoral Central Electoral Office, the institution centralizing electoral information. The data was coded according to gender, political party, ethnic minorities groups, incumbent and new comer status. There is substantial gender inequality in party practices and the increase in descriptive representation is not simply lists but a changed opportunity structure. I argue here that there is an apparent anomaly of recent Social Democratic Party (PSD) gender progress, that “progress” is conjunctural rather than a function of ideology, that the PSD’s support for traditional values offers evidence that it is conjunctural, and not due to a commitment to gender equality. In spite of this most recent change in descriptive representation, many obstacles remain and the increase should be carefully considered in a wider context before considering it a benchmark of any substantial commitment for gender equality. Keywords: women’s political representation; Romanian parliamentary elections; postcommunism. 1
I am extremely greateful to Jeffrey Isaac for its careful reading of the paper and very useful comments and suggestions that helped me to clarify and strengthen the arguments.
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
30 Introduction2
In December 2016, Romania organized parliamentary elections using a proportional representation (PR) system, with closed party lists. During previous elections (1990, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004), a similar electoral system organized political candidacies and voting. For only two election cycles (2008, 2012), the country adopted a mixed system, with uninominal candidacies that included proportionality in allocation of political mandates. Even if literature and empirical research seem to conclude that more women are nominated and elected under proportional electoral systems (Norris, 2004; Matland, 2005), the results of the elections of the above mentioned two election cycles did not alter the percentage of elected women MPs. The electoral system alone has not influenced the descriptive representation of women in Romania. It is political parties that have the most prominent role during elections irrespective of the type of electoral system since they decide the placement of female candidates in eligible positions on party lists and the constituency where they nominate women and men. Despite the fact that 6 out of 8 parliamentary elections were based on closed party lists, it was only after December 2016 elections that women reached the highest
2
The article is published as a product of the ICUB –The Research Institute of The University of Bucharesy grant, no 15573/2016, Is incumbency a predictor of political support for women? Does incumbency reduce gender bias in candidate selection? I presented parts of this research during three presentations: Is incumbency a predictor of political support for women? Does incumbency reduce gender bias in candidate selection? Indiana University, Bloomington, April 2017, Society for Romanian Studies Conference; Femei și bărbați în Parlamentul României – rolul partidelor politice în reprezentarea politică de gen, ICUB Workshop, 12.05.2017; A new narrative for legislative elections and the role of incumbency in increasing women’s representation in Romanian Parliament, Democracy in Development Comparative Perspectives on the Governance of the Public Good, SCOPE Conference, The 4th edition is organized by the Centre for International Cooperation and Development Studies (IDC) of the Faculty of Political Science at the University of Bucharest 27.05.2017. I am grateful for all the comments and questions I received from: Jeffrey Isaac, Maria Bucur, Ionela Băluță, Camil Pârvu, Laurențiu Ștefan.
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
31
descriptive representation in the parliament (19%) after the fall of communism without the implementation of legislative gender quotas3. Table 1 The evolution of women’s legislative descriptive representation Elections 1990-1992 1992-1996 1996-2000 2000-2004 2004-2008 2008-2012 2012-2016 2016-present
Women (%) 4.9% 3.7% 4.7% 10.8% 10.2% 9.8% 11.5% 19%
In a 2015 article addressing the discourses generated on political representation by MPs and the Gender Equality Coalition in an endeavor to strengthen women’s representation in the 2016 Parliamentary elections, I expressed no optimism whatsoever regarding the reinstatement of party lists. Judging by previous experience of party lists, I considered there were no high hopes for a substantial change in women’s presence into Parliament (Băluță, 2015, p. 34). Yet, the 8.5% increase of women’s descriptive representation in the absence of legislative gender quotas asks for a careful reflection that goes beyond uninominal candidacies and closed party lists. The aim of the paper is to explain and support with electoral data the 8.5% increase in women’s descriptive representation. The change in descriptive representation is even more challenging in a political context that is highly resistant to gender representation4 and gender quotas. My intention is to elaborate an argument grounded in a larger opportunity structure that opened doors for a better descriptive representation of women, although an unintended one.
3
4
The proportion of women in The Great National Assembly (the communist Parliament) reached 34 % in 1989 after the introduction of quotas (Băluță, 2006, p. 140). See the comments generated by a proposal on gender quotas from 2011 in Băluță O. 2014; 2015.
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
32
In the next section of the paper I critically reflect on literature and research addressing political representation in Romania and Central and Eastern Europe in order to strengthen that new avenues need to be embraced by scholars, avenues that both question the adequacy of explanation patterns and later on operationalize in specific contexts the findings of better researched countries. Then I offer a descriptive depiction of data from the 2017 parliamentary elections to explain the 8.5% increase in descriptive representation. In the last part I develop a broader argument grounded in a opportunity structure that had been gradually shaped by different actors providing the benchmark for the 8.5% increase in descriptive representation. I shall briefly summarize the key points of my paper. There is substantial gender inequality in party practices and the increase in descriptive representation is not simply lists but a changed opportunity structure. I argue here that there is an apparent anomaly of recent Social Democratic Party (PSD) gender progress, that “progress” is conjunctural rather than a function of ideology, that the PSD’s support for traditional values offers evidence that it is conjunctural, and not due to a commitment to gender equality. In spite of this most recent change in descriptive representation, many obstacles remain and the increase should be carefully considered in a wider context before considering it a benchmark of any substantial commitment for gender equality.
What do we know by now on women’s descriptive representation in Romania? Scholars have documented women’s consistent underrepresentation in Romanian politics since long after the fall of communism. Yet research on the topic is developed in comparison with other countries, and little is known and correlated with substantial data about the role of political parties, electoral system, political ambition, the effects of NGO’s mobilization on representation, gender gap in policy preferences, the role played by various societal features (e.g., women's labor force participation and marital status, divorce rates and labor market) etc. My argument is that our knowledge on women and political representation
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
33
in Romania needs to expand and reflect more on the challenges and opportunities posed by political factors. A review of literature addressing political representation in Romania and in Eastern Europe more generally shows that women’s political representation needs to be perceived as a legitimate topic to be addressed by researchers and later on carefully considered from a theoretical and empirical viewpoint.
Can political, socioeconomic and cultural factors work together in a larger matrix? Political representation of women has been an important area for empirical research and theory production since the middle of the last century. There is consistent international research dedicated to the role of political parties in the equation of women’s political representation (Norris & Lovenduski 1995; Norris 1997; Fox & Lawless, 2005; Niven 2010; Caul 2010; Krook 2010 etc.). During the recruitment process, political parties act as gatekeepers. Research provides evidence for party gender bias that may clarify political parties’ hesitation to support women candidates (Fox & Lawless 2005) and also creates a framework for analyzing party recruitment (Norris & Lovenduski, 1995; Norris 1997; Krook 2010). Yet not very often have political factors come under the scrutiny of consistent research and public debates in post-communist countries (except for Matland & Montgomery, 2003). According to Montgomery (2003),”most studies focus on the twenty-five or so most affluent and long-standing democracies and find that political factors (the design of electoral rules and party characteristics) hold the greatest explanatory power” (Montgomery 2003: 5). However, studies of lesser developed countries tend to emphasize socioeconomic and cultural factors for women’s under-representation (low levels of education, workforce participation). At the same time, Montgomery notices that the emphasis on these factors “depends […] on whether the researcher sees political equality as a product of certain social and cultural prerequisites or as primarily the consequence of incentives created by institutional and political choices” (Montgomery 2004: 6). The
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
34
analysis considering political factors shaping political representation is almost absent in Romania as researchers have focused almost exclusively on cultural and socioeconomic factors (Pasti 2003; Miroiu 2004; Popescu 2004), emphasizing gender roles, the educational system, party ideology, and socio-economic obstacles have been (Băluță I., 2013; Băluță O. 2013; Băluță O. 2006; Ghebrea, Tătărâm, Crețoiu 2005; Miroiu, 2004; Popescu, 2004; Pasti, 2003). In Gender in Politics, Paxton, Kunovich and Hughes conclude that “researchers know a great deal about women in formal politics in the West, especially in countries such as the United States, the UK (…), and Norway (...). Much less is currently known about women in developing countries (…) and in some regions such as Asia” (Paxton, Kunovich, Hughes 2007: 275). Even if Romania is no longer a developing country per se, it does seem to be one when reflecting on political representation both from a theoretical and empirical viewpoint. To reiterate my central point: there is a substantial gap5 between the operationalization of political factors to address political representation in local research in comparison with research on other countries (Hungary, UK, USA, Argentina to name a few). The Romanian context is especially challenging due to vivid civic mobilization starting with 2012 and with the emerging of new political parties on the electoral landscape.
5
In 2016, while attending a conference at CEU, a colleague asked me what I bring new when I told her that I was doing research on political recruitment. More precisely, I was interviewing women and men MPs at that time. For a few seconds I looked confused since filling in a gap in international research is a contribution per se. I wonder how can one do further comparative work and include Romania in recruitment studies focusing on gender also, unless for this step? Or how can one develop strategies to increase women’s descriptive representation without undertaking this avenue, even if, perhaps, an old fashioned one? Women’s Access to Political Power în Post-Communist Europe (2003) edited by Richard E. Matland and Kathleen A. Montgomery include no case study on Romania, while Parliamentary elites in Central and Eastern Europe. Recruitment and representation (2014) edited by Elena Semenova, Michael Edinger, and Heinrich Best barely addresses gender. However, to give credits to the question, there is novelty and an overall contribution to the studies in the field because of the particular opportunity structure that I shall address in this paper.
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
35
Recruitment studies and descriptive representation of women, mostly shunning each other: research strategies Though recruitment is a research topic of scholars focusing on Central and Eastern Europe, their collective work addressing parliamentary elites does not include a gender perspective (Semenova, Edinger, Best 2014). Research has also typically relied upon aggregate trends in the composition of the elite over time – education, age, occupations etc. Considering the above, I argue that the role played by political parties in recruiting candidates should be analyzed to understand and explain women’s under-representation in the Romanian parliament. This needs to be also correlated with a different methodological approach to help us move beyond the counting scheme, as I shall explain in the following section. In the case of recruitment studies we also need to critically discuss means and methods to better explain the descriptive representation of women. Political recruitment. Gender, race and class in British parliament, published twelve years ago by Pippa Norris and Joni Lovenduski, stands as a benchmark in the field of political recruitment studies (Norris & Lovenduski 1995; Norris 1997). One of the book’s central arguments is that: “studies have too frequently counted what can be counted, without a broader theoretical framework. Individual-level survey evidence needs to be considered to understand how applicants experience the process, their perceptions of the electorate, and their strategy in securing seats (…). Unless we understand micro-level data – lifetime career patterns of individuals to see how some politicians move into elite positions while others fail – we will be limited to describing rather than explaining the phenomenon” (Norris & Lovenduski 1995: 11). As far as I am aware, even if research on post-communist Romanian parliamentary elites started in 2003, along the years, the role played by recruitment practices in the under-representation of women has not caught the interest of researchers (Ștefan & Grecu 2014; Muntean & Preda, 2016 – the most recent). One recent study of candidate list placement in closed-list PR that is an exception in the broader field of recruitment studies and descriptive representation of women in Romania, and follows Norris and Lovendusk’s advice, concludes that women candidates
36
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
receive lower placements than men but that experienced parliamentarians do not face this challenge. This being the case, “(…) the observed under-representation of women in Romanian legislatures should probably be attributed to forces in the broader social and political context that discourage women from becoming involved in politics and aspiring to become parliamentary candidates” (Chiru & Popescu 2016:11). My argument differs in some essential respects, since I believe that the role of political parties and their recruiting practices has hardly begun to be addressed in a serious way. The legislative recruitment process includes the pool of eligible, aspirants, candidates and MPs. It is the party gatekeepers that determine whether a person moves from the stage of aspirant to a party candidate. Both external and internal pressures influence the selection process. The former refer to “party concerns with how their nominees will be evaluated by voters”, while the latter include political ideology, internal pressure for better representation, etc. (Matland & Montgomery 2003: 24-25). If we analyze electoral lists, we notice that women aspire to become candidates, but they get poorer ranking, thus less opportunities to win a mandate (see Table 2). Undeniably, more men are present on party lists than women (72.2% were nominated for the 2016 elections). However, we still need to figure out what happens with the women who get nominated, what are the criteria for ranking or for allocating a constituency. My intention is not to downplay the recruitment environment (societal culture, economic development), but to argue that recruitment structures (party rules and norms) need a more in-depth analysis especially since they are more malleable. It is easier to change electoral rules than social and cultural attributes. And there is a substantial body of political science research that persuasively demonstrates that institutions matter as much as if not more as cultural conditions (see literature on “new institutionalism” such as March & Olsen, 1984, etc.) In this paper, I argue that we need to reflect more on how we research political recruitment, and consider the value but also the limits
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
37
of quantitative data and sophisticated statistical modeling, and the need to also analyze party recruitment practices in a careful way6.
What concepts feel the urge to travel and what are the limits? In their article, Paxton, Kunovich and Hughes conclude that future research must reflect more on which theories developed in the West apply to the non-Western context, develop new theories and understand whether these new theories apply to other regions (Paxton, Kunovich, Hughes 2007: 275). The role played by ideology in political representation is still debated. If left parties were considered more opened to support women’s candidacies, other researchers dispute the idea (Caul 2010: 160). Thus, “the traditional unidimensional left-right ideological continuum may be too simple to describe how ideology affects women’s representation” (Caul 2010: 160). If Western researchers debate the role played by ideology and elaborate on the role of more sophisticated distinctions (new left parties with post-materialist values), ideology per se is challenged in Romania. Save Romania Party, a newly established political party, at its first legislative electoral experience in 2016, refused to assume any clear ideological values and denounced left versus right as too restrictive. Even if a single party and not an alliance, it presented itself in elections as a wider value-oriented platform opened to all ideological preferences. Corruption and anti-corruption seems to be the only acknowledged and 6
This paper questions research practices, however it does not have a substantial contribution in expanding new horizons through the means of qualitative research. The research I am working on regarding the role of political parties in gender political representation is an ongoing process. The conclusions will be more nuanced in the near future as I have completed the field research that includes 30 interviews with MPs or candidates for the 2016 parliamentary elections, members of The Social Democratic Party, The National Liberal Party and The Save Romania Party (more than 50 hours of interviewing). I believe that this micro level approach will allow me to investigate one process that in highly complex since multiple factors and actors decide who gets selected and why and explain the recruitment model(s) used by political parties and whether and how it is individualized by gender and political party.
38
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
recognized cleavage. Unlike this new party, “the official” leftist party, The Socialist Democratic Party, displays both populist and conservative preferences when it comes to alternative lifestyles and minority rights. There is ideological confusion or lack of cohesiveness at the level of political parties that obfuscates its operationalization. I shall return to this idea in the section dedicated to the opportunity structure. The correlation between political ideology and women’s descriptive representation poses challenges and needs to be carefully addressed. Irrespective of the 2016 elections, another party moved from left to right before Romania became a member state of EU. The Democratic Party abandoned The Socialist International in 2005 and one year later became a member of The European Popular Party. The ideological move from left to right, did not negatively affect women’s descriptive representation. In 2008, eleven women won parliamentarian mandates in a context where the overall number of MPs supported by the party increased. In an attempt to explain women’s under-representation in the Hungarian and Romanian Parliaments, Cristina Chiva notices that PDSR/PSD (“the official” leftist party) PDSR/PSD has been “considerably more inclined than other parties to promote legislation in the field of equal opportunities” (Chiva 2005: 986). In this article, she concludes that party ideology carries a more powerful explanatory force than the electoral system (Chiva 2005: 990). A chronological approach tells us that neither ideology nor electoral system can fully explain patterns of representation, and that party organization (the degree of institutionalization) and models of recruitment (patronage or meritocratic) etc. are crucial. In the case of PSD, its statute as a catch-all party that encompasses a ‘grand’ notion of representation of various social groups may explain better its electoral behavior. For this paper the role of ideology is significant and as I shall argue in the final section, ideology may function as conceptual trap when it comes to PSD. The party functions as a catch-all party aiming to represent all groups. Setting explanatory variables in a larger contextual setting is important. The international context and its statute as a ruling party explain the choice of PSD to promote gender equality legislation. Romania embarked on the road to European integration and advanced
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
39
gender equality legislation during 2000-2004 with PSD as the party holding a political majority. The integration of the acquis communautaire is mandatory, not the reflection of an ideological preference. Mihaela Miroiu advances the concept of room- service feminism that encapsulates legislative changes prior to integration; the term refers to the import of gender sensitive policies via the authority of EU and other international actors without a previous acknowledgement of the necessity of such laws, policies and institutions (Miroiu 2004: 257). My study aims to pin point the role of political parties in 2016 parliamentary elections and also assumes its limits in terms of research methods. Even if the data7 offers a descriptive image of the elections, the approach corroborated with the discussion on vulnerabilities in research and theoretical approaches still allows a more thorough discussion concerning the opportunity structure that opened new possibilities for the increase in women’s representation.
Research questions and data The data8 used is based on results published by the electoral Central Electoral Office, the institution centralizing electoral information9. The data was coded according to gender, political party, ethnic minorities groups, incumbent and new comer status. A candidate was incumbent if she or he acted as an MP during the last legislative term (2012-2016). Out of the overall number of candidates and political competitors, I focused the analysis only on political parties that mobilized enough votes to pass the electoral threshold (ethnic minorities groups including as they have reserved seats). 7
8
9
If we contextualize research, I need to add that for a number of years researchers argued in favor of data transparency. The Coalition for Gender Equality formulated accusations against public institutions due to lack of gender segregated data on the 2016 elections. http://www.stiripesurse.ro/coalitia-pentruegalitate-de-gen-aproape-o-treime-dintre-candidatii-la-parlamentare-sunt-femei_ 1163431.html I am deeply grateful to my friend, PhD Cristina Mocanu who provided consistent support in the world of quantitative data. Biroul Electoral Central, Statistic of the 2016 Parliamentary Elections, http://par lamentare2016.bec.ro/statistici/
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
40
When analyzing electoral lists and placement, the general assumption was that political parties were informed about where they could win more seats – the expectation is rather solid since local elections precede legislative elections and parties have internal simulations10 of eligible positions and constituencies. The data selected answer to the following questions: 1. Is there gender disparity in the nomination phase? How many women and men were nominated by political parties? 2. Is there gender disparity when it comes to ranking? What position do women occupy on party lists? Does the statute of new versus old political parties matter? Is it important whether the leader of the party is an experienced politician or a former civic activist? – New political competitors: are newly established political parties that had never participated in previous national parliamentary elections. Three parties can be placed under this category: ALDE, PMP, USR. – New political party established by former civic activist/ inexperienced versus experienced politicians): one political party was established by a former civic activist (USR) while the rest of political parties (either new or old) by experienced politicians (PSD, PNL, USR, ALDE, PMP, UDMR). 3. Does incumbency play a role when it comes to descriptive representation in 2016? If proven electability, will women be nominated at the same rate as men or, at least, there won’t be such a harsh gender disparity? 4. Does the newcomer/ non-incumbent status play a role when it comes to descriptive representation in 2016? Quantitative research has its own limitations as I have argued before. I do not assume to explain more than descriptive statistics permits; the data, for example, does not allow me to explain why women and men are ranked differently on party lists, as we shall see. 10
The information was transmitted during field research, while interviewing MPs. Poor securing of seats due to placement on party list and allocation of constituency is a powerful incentive for candidates to either negotiate with the party a future administrative position or refuse nominalization.
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
41
Yet in spite of its limits, the data allows a broader discussion of the political opportunity structure that has been gradually shaped by mass protests starting with 2012.
Analysis Question 1. Is there gender disparity in the nomination phase? How many women and men were nominated by political parties? Political parties and candidate nomination When we ask ourselves the simple question ‘who gets nominated?’ the answer is strikingly clear: mostly men get to be nominated by political parties during the recruitment process. When looking at data, it is important to notice that the number of women who are nominated does not reach the critical mass of 30%. Table 2 Gender and party nomination Frequency
Percent
Men
4678
72.2
Women
1798
27.8
Total
6476
100.0
How many women and men were elected? Women represent 19% of the elected officials with only 20 women senators. The poor descriptive representation has secondary effects on the decision making within the permanent commissions of the Senate as not all have women as members since there are 22 permanent commissions and 20 women senators.
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
42
Table 3 Gender and legislative mandates
Chamber of Deputies Senate Total
Men
Women
TOTAL MPs
248
64
312
116
20
136
364
84
448 ( + 17 ethnic minorities)
The Commission for defense, public order and national security11 and the Commission for regional development, management of state funds and privatization12 are male-constituted structures: 11 men. There is an almost hilarious side effect since The Commission on Equal Opportunities has only one woman senator and she was appointed Minister of the Internal Affairs in Grindeanu’s cabinet. Nevertheless, there were no women members of the Commission during the last legislature. Thus, only men senators make decisions in the field of equal opportunities (9 men).
Elected officials. Party and gender According to Table no 4, ALDE scores the poorest in elected women, while PSD has the highest number of elected women MPs. In order to understand the distribution of mandates according to gender, it is important to identify on one hand how many women were nominated by the parliamentary parties and how did political parties rank women and men on the electoral lists.
11
12
Comisia pentru apărare, ordine publică şi siguranță națională, https://www.senat .ro/ComponentaComisii.aspx?Zi=&ComisieID=F3E4672C-E333-44E0-B781-70D7F 273EE1C Comisia pentru dezvoltare regională, administrarea activelor statului și privatizare, https://www.senat.ro/ComponentaComisii.aspx?Zi=&ComisieID=1A267697-12334582-B49A-39B610B70DA2
Table 4a Political parties and elected women (%) Party Elected women (%)
PNL 16.16%
PMP 7.69%
PSD 23.52%
UDMR 13.33%
ALDE 6.89%
USR 18.60%
Table 4b Political parties and elected women (numbers) PNL
PMP
PSD
UDMR
ALDE
USR
M
W
Total
M
W
Total
M
W
Total
M
W
Total
M
W
Total
M
W
Total
58
11
69
17
1
18
113
41
154
17
4
21
18
2
20
25
5
30
Senate
25
5
30
7
1
8
56
11
67
9
0
9
9
0
9
10
3
13
Chamber of Deputies
83
16
99
24
2
26
169
52
221
26
4
30
27
2
29
35
8
43
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
44 Nomination and distribution per parliamentary party
Table 5 Political parties and women’s nomination 2016 Nomination
Men
Women
Elected women 2016
PSD
71.5%
28.5%
23.52%
PNL
74.6%
25.4%
16.16%
USR
74.7%
25.3%
18.60%
UDMR + MINORITATI
71.6%
28.4%
13.33% + 23.52%
ALDE
76.7%
23.3%
6.89%
PMP
76.4%
23.6%
7.69%
Previous political experience of leaders is important when it comes to nominating women by parties participating in legislative elections for the first time. Both ALDE and PMP nominated fewer women than USR. It is worth mentioning that unlike USR they had consistently more time to actively recruit women as party members and later on support their candidacies. ALDE and PMP were consolidated by experienced politicians; the former was established in 2015, in connection with the former Prime minister, the latter, in 2013, by supporters of the former president, Traian Băsescu, who led the party in the 2016 elections. USR became a national political organization in 2016 due to the efforts of a former civic activist, a person displaying far less political experience in comparison with the former Prime-minister and President of the country. As political organizations, ALDE and PMP seem to have been established to consolidate the power of men formerly occupying key positions in the state apparatus. Table 5 also shows that both PSD and ethnic minorities individualize themselves as more gender friendly. The PSD also nominated a much
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
45
higher number of women than the right13 wing-oriented parties (PNL, ALDE, PMP). We also notice more women nominated by ethnic minorities groups, a decision that is rather unique since UDMR has not been that open to nominating women in previous elections. In 2004, the last year when legislative elections were organized on the basis of party lists, UDMR nominated women either in top positions on the party lists in constituencies where the ethnic group did not have voters or placed women on eligible positions outside its traditional winning constituencies (Băluță, 2014, p. 81-81). As a consequence, no woman from UDMR was elected in the Parliament. Coming back to the first question addressed in the paper, data shows that there is gender disparity in the nomination phase. There is an important gender disparity in the nomination phase when women do not even reach the 30% critical mass. When it comes to nominating candidates, we saw that PSD and ethnic groups (PSD – 182 women, UDMR- 177 women) nominated the highest number of women. Question 2. Is there gender disparity when it comes to ranking? What position do they occupy on party lists? Does the statute of new versus old political parties matter? Is it important whether the leader of the party is an experienced politician or a former civic activist?
Party lists and ranking I chose to exemplify the distribution of women and men on party lists for the first 12 positions in Table 6 because of the magnitude of the constituency that varies from 1 to 12 with one exception, Bucharest (13 for the Senate, 29 for the Chamber of Deputies14). According to data, 13
14
On a left-right scale, PNL, PMP and ALDE are situated on the right spectrum of politics each, some more inclined in various degrees towards liberalism or conservatism. It is difficult to position PSD on the political left due to the fact that in terms of identity politics it has a more conservative approach that situates it closer to right wing parties. I shall discuss more the relationship between the party and identity politics in the final part of the paper. http://www.2016bec.ro/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Lege-208-2015.pdf
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
46
women occupied 3rd and 4th position on the lists, while men occupied the top two positions of the list. Quantitative data does not allow me to formulate explanations for this distribution, only to take notice of it and its effects on the descriptive representation. Table 6 Party lists and ranking Ranking on the electoral list
Men
Women
1
83.1%
16.9%
2
75.6%
24.4%
3
67.0%
33.0%
4
68.8%
31.2%
5
69.8%
30.2%
6
70.0%
30.0%
7
74.0%
26.0%
8
72.0%
28.0%
9
74.1%
25.9%
10
69.9%
30.1%
11
58.4%
41.6%
12
73.1%
26.9%
How did parliamentary parties rank men and women?
Data shows that there is gender disparity in ranking, too. It is men who have a substantial advantage when it comes to ranking higher on the electoral list. PSD and UDMR ranked the highest number of women on the first position on the electoral list. PSD did rank women on winning positions and also it won the majority of political mandates. Also, new political parties (USR, ALDE, PMP) seem to support women less in comparison with older ones (PSD and PNL), and former political experience does not seem to play a role (PMP nominated 9.3% while USR 11.8%). Nevertheless, given the fact that PMP was established in 2013, it could have been more active in recruiting and promoting women.
Table 7 Party list and gender ranking PSD Ranking
PNL
USR
ALDE
PMP
UDMR
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
1
80.2
19.8
84.9
15.1
88.2
11.8
86
14
90.7
9.3
80.2
19.8
2
80.2
19.8
74.4
25.6
78.7
21.3
77.6
22.4
79.1
20.9
74.4
25.6
3
67.4
32.6
64.7
35.3
56.3
43.7
77.6
22.4
64
36
67.4
32.6
4
59.3
40.7
69
31
68.9
31.1
77.1
22.9
72.6
27.4
73.3
26.7
5
73.1
26.9
77.3
22.7
77.3
22.7
67.7
32.3
77.3
22.7
73.1
26.9
6
71.4
28.6
73.2
26.8
75.7
24.3
81.5
18.5
66.1
33.9
75.4
24.6
7
76.9
23.1
84.2
15.8
69.6
30.4
81.6
18.4
84.2
15.8
76.3
23.7
8
69.2
30.8
73.1
26.9
83.3
16.7
84.6
15.4
73.1
26.9
65.4
34.6
9
76.2
23.8
85.7
14.3
83.3
16.7
66.7
33.3
80.0
20.0
76.2
23.8
10
50.0
50.0
80.0
20.0
100.0
81.3
18.8
81.3
18.8
68.8
31.3
11
64.3
35.7
57.1
42.9
57.1
42.9
42.9
57.1
78.6
21.4
64.3
35.7
12
78.6
21.4
71.4
28.6
85.7
14.3
71.4
28.6
92.9
7.1
30.8
69.2
48
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
Political parties eschewed electoral legislation. Party lists were elaborated and later on validated by the County Electoral Offices with a breach of electoral legislation. According to Law no 208/2015, art 52: “the lists of candidates for the election of deputies and senators need to ensure the representation of both genders, except for the one candidate list.” Nevertheless, parliamentary political parties advanced electoral lists only with men for the Chamber of Deputies: ALDE (3 constituencies), PMP (1 constituency), USR (1 constituency) and Senate: PMP (3), PNL (1). It seems to be important whether a party is a new or old established political organization. New political competitors (ALDE, PMP, USR: 415 women) nominated less women then older ones (PSD, PNL, UDMR: 519 women). Unlike USR that was established as a national party a few months before legislative elections, both PMP and ALDE had more time to actively recruit women. Previous political experience of the party leader seems to play a role in the case of newly established political parties that joined legislative elections for the first time in 2016. Parties established by experienced politicians (ALDE – former Prime minister, PMP- former president) nominated fewer women than parties another political competitor established by an inexperienced politician (USR). Nevertheless, when it comes to ranking, political experience does not seem to play a role in ranking. Due to the fact that “The Presidential Party” has fewer nominated and elected women it appears to be a party established to support men.
Question 3. Does incumbency play a role when it comes to descriptive representation in 2016? If proven electability, will women be nominated at the same rate as men or, at least, there won’t be such a visible gender disparity? For the sake of the argument, if we assume that women are an electoral risk, if proven electability, women incumbents should be nominated at the same rate with men incumbents. In the nomination phase, out of a total number of 6476 candidates, 268 were incumbents and tried to win a mandate again in 2016. Parliamentary political parties supported 245 incumbents. There is gender imbalance among the incumbents as out of the 245 incumbents
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
49
supported by political parties that reached the 5% threshold, 209 (85%) are men and 36 (15%) are women. In the nomination phase, women incumbents will not benefit of the same support from political parties, not even if they have already proven electability. Table 8 Gender and incumbent status Incumbents Men Women Total
Nomination phase 209 (85%) 36 (15%) 245 nominated incumbents
Election phase 147 (70,33%) 23 (63,88%) 170
In the election phase we see that 170 won a new mandate in 2016: 23 women and 147 men. More men incumbents then women are elected 70,33% in comparison with 63,88%. In the following section I shall look at electoral lists and ranking done by political parties together with strategies of incumbents to secure safe seats.
Electoral lists and ranking of incumbents Table 9a Incumbents, gender and party lists
Ranking on the list
Total
Men
Women
Total incumbents
1
97 (66.0%)
12 (52.2%)
109 (64.1%)
2
35 (23.8%)
6 (26.1%)
41 (24.1%)
3
10 (6.8%)
4 (17.4%)
14 (8.2%)
4
2
0
2
5
2
0
2
6
0
1
1
7
1
0
1
147
23
170
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
50
All political parties favored men incumbents on the first position of the electoral list. The least chances of winning mandates a political party has, the least opportunities it gives to women, thus men better secure their seats. ALDE (12) and PMP (7) strongly favored men to occupy the first position on the list. Older parties, PNL (4) and PSD (6) were more generous. Overall, men incumbents get wider support in the party in comparison with women incumbents. Table 9b Incumbents, gender and party lists Electoral list. Ranking
Ethnic minorities
ALDE
PMP
PNL
PSD
UDMR
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
1
6
0
12
2
7
0
27
4
38
6
7
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
9
1
0
4
4
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
7
3
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Incumbency does not stand as an advantage for women’s descriptive representation. Political parties do not re-nominate candidates who can win regardless of gender. Political parties renominate more men incumbents than women. Unless men have an opportunity to win a new mandate, they change electoral district to get a safer electoral district. Among incumbents, parties treat women candidates differently from men when it comes to ranking on party list. Men who are re-nominated usually occupy the first position on the list, while women are placed on the second or the third place. There is gender disparity in the nomination process, in ranking and allocation of an electoral district. Unlike other researches who concluded that nomination strategies of political parties place substantially more emphasis on candidates' incumbency statuses than on their genders, for the 2016 legislative elections, gender has been important at the
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
51
nomination stage for both incumbents and non-incumbents (newcomers), and it is important in raking candidates and in the allocation of an electoral district. Question 4. Does the newcomer/ non-incumbent status play a role when it comes to descriptive representation in 2016? Table 10 Elected officials: incumbents and newcomers
Incumbents
New comers
Total
%
Incumbents
Newcomers
Total
Men
147
232
379
Men
38.80%
61.20%
100%
Women
23
63
86
Women
26.70%
73.30%
100%
Total
170
295
465
Total
36.60%
63.40%
100%
When it comes to gender, more men are incumbents while more women are among the newcomers. This is one important finding given the historical over-representation of men amongst incumbents. Overall, incumbency does not stand as an advantage. Many studies emphasize how (male) incumbency restricts women's opportunities to run for, and obtain mandates (Studlar & McAllister 1991; Matland & Studlar 2004; Schwindt-Bayer 2005). Current male over-representation may be also correlated to historical patterns because incumbents have significant advantages in nomination and electoral competition. At the same time, previous research concluded that in Romania the degree of renewal of MPs is rather high and we can hardly find professionalization of MPs (Ștefan & Grecu, 2014). All political parties, except one, favored newcomers more. Two political parties placed more emphasis of incumbency: ALDE and PNL. The Social Democratic Party put more emphasis on newcomers as an electoral strategy. ALDE and PMP supported more men either as incumbents or newcomers. PSD shows the highest support for women either as incumbents or newcomers, but especially as newcomers.
Table 11 Elected officials. Political parties and preference for incumbents and newcomers Ethnic minorities
ALDE
PMP
PNL
PSD
UDMR
USR
Total
Incumbents
35.30%
51.70%
30.80%
45.50%
38%
40%
0
36.60%
Newcomers
64.70%
48.30%
69.20%
54.50%
62%
60%
100%
63.40%
Table 12 Incumbents and newcomers. Political party and gender Ethnic minorities M W
ALDE
PMP
PNL
PSD
UDMR
USR
Total
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
Incumbents
6
0
13
2
8
0
39
6
70
14
11
1
0
0
170
Newcomers
7
4
14
0
17
1
45
9
99
38
15
3
35
8
295
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
53
Strategies to secure seats Table 13 Strategies to secure seats Change of electoral district
Total incumbents
Yes
No
Ethnic minorities
0
6
6
ALDE
2
13
15
PMP
3
5
8
PNL
8
37
45
PSD
9
75
84
UDMR
0
12
12
22
148
170
Party_2016
Total
In the case of strategies that incumbents use for re-election, they change electoral district, we notice that 22 MPs changed their electoral district to increase their chances to be reelected. Considerably more men changed their constituency in comparison with women: 20 men and 2 women in a position of power: one was the president of National Liberal Party15 and the second is a professionalized woman MP16, winning the fourth mandate in 2016.
Opportunity structure and its unintended effects We saw in the previous section that after the 2016 legislative elections women’s descriptive representation increased with 8.5%. The change better situates Romania now in a world classification17.The argument that I will elaborate on is that the 2016 legislative elections 15 16 17
Alina Gorghiu. Moldovan (Mihalcescu) Carmen Ileana, 2000-2004, 2008-2012, 2012-2016, 2016-present. The country occupies position 89 according to a situation as of June 1st 2017 http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm. In May 2016, the country occupied position 129.
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
54
took place in a different opportunity structure that had as an unintended effect the increase in women’s descriptive representation. Several political and civic developments led to what I call a transformative and unintended descriptive representation. The opportunity structure is constituted by several waves of protests generated by austerity measures, green issues, anti-corruption etc., an overall distrust in political parties and politicians, soft pressure exercised by NGOs’ mobilization for better political representation, strategic advancement of gender quota legislation one year prior the legislative elections, party elections within PSD and a renewal of political loyalty, specific legislative provisions for the 2016 elections. I will discuss each political and societal factor briefly.
Waves of protests The waves of protest are not unique to Romania, and correlate with other mass mobilization from Europe (Spain, Greece, France), and the US (Occupy). Strating with 2012 we could notice mounting criticism against political parties and Parliament, and a growing feeling of distrust in politics that gave rise to several waves of protests that have individual triggers and also shared commonalities. Both the Parliament and political parties scored the worst in public opinion pools measuring citizens’ level of trust: 12.8% and 8.6% in 201518. Waves of protests erupted in Romania triggered by austerity measures, green issues, healthcare, and allegations of corruption. University Square and anti-austerity measures (2012), Roșia Montană and the exploitation of natural resources (2013), Colectiv 2015 (healthcare and corruption) shape a cycle of protests that also continued in the winter of 2017. These protests changed governments and reconfigured political majorities. The 2013 and 2015 waves of protest are directly connected to PSD since the first was triggered by a bill supported by Ponta Government (PSD) allowing a mining company to exploit resources at Roșia Montană, while the second was generated by a deadly Bucharest nightclub fire that killed 64 18
http://revista22.ro/70250907/inscop-doar-128--dintre-romni-au-incredere-n-parla ment-86--au-incredere-n-partide.html
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
55
people and was widely blamed on corrupt officials ignoring safety regulations. In 2015, PSD was forced out of power and a technocratic Government took the lead, supported by both the political majority and the opposition until the 2016 elections. The waves of protests included demands for a change of political praxis. It is in this context of change that I integrate a slightly different approach to political recruitment coming from old established political parties, PSD in particular, since it has been heavily criticized for being a corrupt organization (we have seen a stronger emphasis put on newcomers in comparison with incumbents). However, the waves of protests per se do not explain the increase in women’s descriptive representation; they make the parties more aware of the recruitment process. Nevertheless, after the legislative elections, in February 2017, the largest protests after the fall of communism started in Romania to force the Government to withdraw anti-corruption laws. Soft pressure to advance gender quotas: NGOs and MPs In December 2015, the Coalition for Gender Equality launched a Call to Action for political parties in the event of coming elections demanding quotas for women, discussed eligible positions and zipper system. I am not naive as to directly correlate this action with the recruitment process where political parties make decisions; my argument is NGOs strengthened once more that gender is a valid criterion to be considered when recruiting candidates. The action of NGOs needs also to be corroborated with a new proposal on quotas – a strategic advancement on my opinion – one year prior the legislative elections. Few MPs from the National Liberal Party – supported by other political groups – advanced a legislative proposal aiming to amend and complete the process of electing the representatives for the two chambers of the Parliament19. I consider this
19
The MPs also elaborated a comparative distinctive proposal focusing on local elections. I analyzed the attempt of NGOs and MPs to both reflect on and increase women’s descriptive representation in the article Creating and feeding discourses on political representation of women. Can MPs and NGOs join hands on quotas?,
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
56
initiative to be more strategic/ instrumental than functional taking into account that it was introduced only a few months before the legislative elections, thus lacking time to go through the entire parliamentary procedure. Also, we know from country level studies that such an attempt demands effort and resources and long term mobilization. The proposal is still in the Parliament. Nevertheless it also emphasized that political parties need to also consider women’s descriptive representation.
Incumbency at the crossroad of party elections and party loyalty In 2015, PSD organized elections and Liviu Dragnea won the presidency with 81,23% of votes. PSD does not value incumbency and previous analysis shows that newcomers outranked experienced MPs (Ștefan & Grecu 2014: 209). In 2008, the last elections organized under the PR system, the party renewed its parliamentary representation more than half. In 2016, we notice that the number of newcomers outscores the incumbents (62% versus 38% – see Table 10). The 2016 choice for renewal is in my opinion an electoral strategy of the new party leadership to ensure party loyalty in the light of important inner tensions between the new and former party president. It also stands as an answer to strong criticism against the party and corruption allegations of party members. It is in this larger critical context corroborated with waves of protests that party leaders advanced the idea that new people need to be recruited. The President of PSD stated that women and young people will occupy eligible positions on the party lists20. Gender and age were valid criteria for nominating candidates. When the lists were registered the President of the party said that almost 70% of the candidates were newcomers, 40% women and 40% young people21.
20
21
published in Analize – Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies, http://www.analizejournal.ro/library/files/5_3.pdf. http://www.psd.ro/media/stiri/liviu-dragnea-candidatii-psd-la-alegerile-parlame ntare-alesi-in-baza-criteriilor-de-performanta http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-alegeri_parlamentare_2016-21382628-lista-completa-nu mele-candidatilor-psd-alegerile-parlamentare-dragnea-ponta-mai-vor-mandat.htm
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
57
Romania faced a new major political crisis, when PSD withdrew the political support for its own previously nominated Government in June 2017. It is in this moment of crisis that the Organization of Women publicly stated its support for the decisions of the party president22 and denounced the actions of the Prime-minister (Sorin Grindeanu) and of the former president of the party and Prime minister, Victor Ponta. Party loyalty is important and it is effective for both parts. Party legal provisions also have played a role. The Statute of the party stipulates gender representation rules: it supports proportional representation of women in all positions and political structures (art 10), 30% of women in party decision making structures (art 47), National Party Committee (BPN) has at least 4 women vice-presidents out of 14 members; women can be both party vice-presidents and presidents of a county party branch (art. 120). These provisions belong to a “proximity inertia” since the party is member of the Socialist International and of PES (Party of European Socialists).
Recruitment environment: legal system Specific legislative provisions for the 2016 elections are part of the opportunity structure. According to Low no. 208/2015, art 52 “the lists of candidates for the election of deputies and senators need to ensure the representation of both genders, except for the one candidate list”. However the legal provisions played a less important role since, as we have already seen. This opportunity structure is highly important on my opinion. Unless we seriously take it into consideration, we might be tempted to attach old explanatory patterns to the political behavior of PSD – left oriented parties support women and minorities. Indisputably, PSD played a major role in the 2016 legislative elections.
22
http://www.cotidianul.ro/femeile-din-psd-zid-in-jurul-lui-liviu-dragnea-302508/
58
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
PSD and the conjunctural support for descriptive representation Why did the percentage of women increase with 8.5%? The data shows that PSD had a crucial role. It valued gender, thus supported more women in comparison with other parties, when it comes to electoral list and ranking, it ranked women higher on the list, on eligible positions as its president said it would, it did not place a great emphasis on incumbents, it supported more newcomers and 27.73% of newcomers are women. According to previous research, incumbency stands as an obstacle when it comes to increasing women’s descriptive representation since men are usually incumbents. Also, it won the majority of mandates in the two chambers. Nevertheless, this political behavior has not occurred overnight and it still needs more contextualization. Attributing the focus on women and young people to a left orientation of the party is on my opinion a political mirage. I argue here that “progress” is conjunctural rather than a function of ideology, that the PSD’s support for traditional values offers evidence that it is conjunctural, and not due to a commitment to gender equality. The intersection between descriptive and substantive representation is a long debated topic and I shall introduce this distinction in this paper, too. I do not consider that a contemporary left political party can ignore or advance strategic and political decisions that negatively affect the substantive representation of women, more precisely sexual and reproductive interests of women. It is the social democratic party (and other two political competitors of the 2016 elections) that signed prior to the legislative elections an electoral alliance with The Coalition for Family Protection, a religious conservative Platform, that initiated a referendum to define marriage as the union between a woman and a man. The document stated that the parties are in favor of the referendum. In its larger programme, the Coalition also introduces different forms of restrictions to sexual and reproductive rights in the name of protection for the unborn persons. Supporting women’s descriptive representation is different from supporting gender equality and thus substantive representation. It is the Coalition for Family that disavows gender per se and gender equality.
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
59
Still, why did the Social Democratic Party have this electoral approach? Why is it that women did better in the Social Democratic Party? I shall advance some explanations informed also by the opportunity structure. 1. The party responsiveness has been shaped across the years by soft internal pressure for better representation. The women’s group of the party has lobbied for better representation. In 2015 when they had elections, 4 vice-presidents seats were reserved for women (10 for men). This internal process conveys one important message: women are a legitimate constituency and elections targeting women candidates are legitimate elections. This acknowledgement is an important difference that separates the party from the rest of its political competitors. 2. Political marketing. The Social Democratic Party marketed itself as a democratic structure that supports women, Roma (and Roma supporters of LGBT) and disabled people during the recruiting process. The diversity political marketing was a strategy to counterbalance accusations of being a conservative and a populist party, overall a less democratic structure or a promoter of illiberal democracy. 3. The Social Democratic Party has been heavily accused of being corrupt. I believe it supported more women to balance corruption allegations. In my opinion, the party may consider women as a curative force. This is not a progressive approach that strengthens gender equality, but a conservative one that in fact can be linked with other conservative public and political statements of The Social Democratic Party: support for the traditional family, amending Constitution so that marriage represents the union between a man and a woman. Also, MPs of The Social Democratic Parties and local elected officials were accused of bullying women of the opposition- this behavior transpired in the national media23. The argument of women as 23
http://adevarul.ro/news/politica/scandal-parlament-deputatul-psd-nicolae-bacalb asa-facut-gesturi-obscene-afirmatii-jignitoare-faci-fractura-mai-dai-labele-1_5911a
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
60
a curative force goes back to the financial and economic crisis when it was argued that financial institutions needed more women in decision making positions “to balance testosterone”. Women were perceived as a curative force after the global financial crisis (Hozic & True 2016). If macho masculinity and male irresponsibility were identified as the root causes of the crisis, then financially savvy and more temperate women have been depicted as the new saviors. This conservative gender imagery might have pervaded the recruiting process of the party. This hypothesis may be further on investigated with the means of qualitative research. This imagery is not a novelty and it can be annually observed on the 8th of March when MPs convey speeches in the parliament to celebrate the day. Irrespective of its origins associated with women’s rights, MPs address homages to women: “because of what they are, for their commitment, delicacy, purity, no tear should cast shade on their eyes, only if not for tears of happiness”24 (Mihai 2017).
Conclusions Advancing women’s descriptive representation as a valid criterion that shows the support of a party – especially a proclaimed left oriented party – for gender equality is a delusive approach. Increasing women’s political representation has long been an aim of feminist social movement and women’s NGOs. This topic is widely discussed and debated in political science literature and it is not my intention to argue otherwise, only to expand the context and draw attention to situational limits of a descriptive progress. In the national and international context where parties and groups advance core issues of an illiberal democracy, women’s descriptive representation needs to be correlated with other
24
2445ab6550cb8eecb0e/index.html, http://epochtimes-romania.com/news/scandalla-primaria-capitalei-usr-anunta-plangere-penala-pentru-agresarea-a-trei-consilie re---259269 Sorin Constantin Stragea (PSD), 3rd of March 2015, http://www.cdep.ro/pls/sten o/steno.stenograma?ids=7466&idm=1,006&idl=1.
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
61
decisions of political parties. Contemporary democracy is facing dark times and social democratic parties need to integrate gender equality, anti-racism, LGBT and green policies (see arguments of Chantal Mouffe). Descriptive representation per se may function as a false commitment to gender equality nowadays especially in political and societal contexts that have no long history in support for gender equality. Religious and conservative groups endanger the substantial gender equality agenda. Gender equality objectives are especially vulnerable in countries where citizens have not integrated its values. Gender equality has been gradually integrated in legislation and institutions; however it is not daily life praxis. According to the Gender European Index25, Romania has the highest level of gender inequality in European Union. In the light of the above mentioned context, the advancement of descriptive representation of women by PSD can hardly be considered a satisfactory step towards more gender equality.
REFERENCES
BĂLUȚĂ, Oana. 2015. Creating and feeding discourses on political representation of women. Can MPs and NGOs join hands on quotas? Analize – Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies, New Series. 5/ 2015: http://www.analize-journal.ro/library/files/5 _3.pdf BĂLUȚĂ, Oana. 2014. Reprezentarea intereselor de gen: între ‘politica ideilor’ şi ‘politica prezenței’. Sfera Politicii, 178/2014: http://www.sferapoliticii.ro/sfera/pdf/Sfera_1 78-Rev1.pdf BĂLUȚĂ, Oana. 2013. Feminism modern reflexiv, Bucharest: Tritonic Publishing House. BĂLUȚĂ, Ionela. 2013. Reprezentarea politică a femeilor: alegerile parlamentare din 2012. Sfera politicii, no 174: 43-50. BĂLUȚĂ, Oana, DRAGOLEA, Alina; IANCU, Alice. 2007. Gen şi interese politice. Iaşi: Polirom. BĂLUȚĂ, Oana (ed.). 2006. Gen și putere. Iași: Polirom. CAUL, Miki. 2010. Women’s Representation in Parliament: The Role of Political Parties. in KROOK, Mona Lena & CHILDS, Sarah, Women, Gender and Politics. A Reader, New York: Oxford University Press: 159-166.
25
https://www.romania-insider.com/romania-ranks-last-in-the-eu-on-equality-betw een-men-and-women/
62
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
CHILDS, Sarah. 2008, Women and British Party Politics. Descriptive, Substantive and Symbolic Representation. New York: Routledge. CHIRU, Mihail & POPESCU, Marina. 2016. The Value of Legislative Versus Electoral Experience and Gender in Explaining Candidate List Placement in Closed-List PR. Problems of Post-Communism, vol. 00, no. 00. 1-14. CHIVA, Cristina. 2005. Women in Post-Communist Politics: Explaining UnderRepresentation in the Hungarian and Romanian Parliaments. Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 57/7: 969-994. FOX, Richard L & LAWLESS, Jennifer. 2010. Entering the Arena? Gender and the Decision to Run for Office. in KROOK, Mona Lena & CHILDS, Sarah. Women, Gender and Politics. A Reader. New York: Oxford University Press: 141-149 HOZIC, Aida A. & TRUE, Jacqui (eds.). 2016. Scandalous Economics. Gender and the politics of Financial Crises, New York: Oxford University Press. GHEBREA, Georgeta; TĂTĂRÂM, Elena Marina; CREȚOIU, Ioana, 2005. Factori care blochează participarea poltică și civică a femeilor – Raport de cercetare. Bucharest: Nemira. KUNOVICH, Sheri & PAXTON, Pamela. 2005. Pathways to Power: The Role of Political Parties in Women‘s National Political Representation. American Journal of Sociology. 111(2): 263-284. KROOK, Mona Lena. 2010. Beyond Supply and Demand: A Feminist – Institutionalist Theory of Candidate Selection. Political Research Quarterly. vol. 63/ 4: 707-720. LAWLESS, Jennifer & PEARSON, Kathryn. 2008. The Primary Reason for Women’s Underrepresentation? Reevaluating the Conventional Wisdom. The Journal of Politics, vol. 70 / 1, 67-82. LOVENDUSKI, Joni. 2010. The Dynamics of Gender and Party. in KROOK, Mona Lena & CHILDS, Sarah, Women, Gender and Politics. A Reader. New York: Oxford University Press: 81-88. MARCH, James G. & OLSEN, Johan P. 1984. The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life. The American Political Science Review. vol. 78 / 3: 734-749. MATLAND, Richard & MONTGOMERY, Kathleen A. 2004. Recruiting Women to National Legislatures: A General Framework with Applications to Post-Communist Democracies. in MATLAND, Richard E. & MONTGOMERY, Kathleen A. (eds.), Women’s Access to Political Power în Post-Communist Europe, Oxford: Oxford Univesity Press. MATLAND, Richard E. 2005. Enhancing Women’s Political Participation: Legislative Recruitment and Electoral Systems. in BALLINGTON Julie & Azza KARAM. Women in Parliament: Beyond Numbers (revised edition). Publications Office, International IDEA: 93-111. MATLAND, Richard E & STUDLAR, Donley T. 2004. Determinants of Legislative Turnover: A Cross-National Analysis. British Journal of Political Science. 34(01): 87-108. MIHAI, Tudorina. 2016. Reprezentarea politică a femeilor din România, în contextul europenizării, PhD these defended at The National School of Political Science and Public Administration. MIROIU, Mihaela. 2004, Drumul către autonomie, Iaşi: Polirom.
WOMEN MPS IN ROMANIA: TROUBLING PATTERNS, RECENT PROGRESS AND ITS LIMITS
63
MUNTEAN, Ioana & PREDA, Marian. 2016. Why does Romania have a negative selection in parliamentary elections? An analysis of recruitment and selection system during the last three legislative terms. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences. 48: 84-103. NIVEN, David. 2010. Party Elites and Women Candidates: The Shape of Bias. in KROOK, Mona Lena & CHILDS, Sarah. Women, Gender and Politics. A Reader. New York: Oxford University Press: 151-158. NORRIS, Pippa & LOVENDSKI, Joni. 1995. Political Recruitment. Gender, race and class in the British Parliament, New York: Cambridge University Press. NORRIS, Pippa (eds.). 1997. Passages to Power. Legislative recruitment in advanced democracies, New York: Cambridge University Press. PASTI, Vladimir. 2003. Ultima inegalitate. Iași: Polirom. PHILLIPS, Anne. 1998. The Politics of Presence, New York: Oxford University Press. POPESCU, Liliana. 2004. Politica sexelor. Bucharest: Maiko Publishing House. SHAIR-ROSENFIELD, Sarah & HINOJOSA, Magda. 2014. Does Female Incumbency Reduce Gender Bias in Elections? Evidence from Chile. Political Research Quarterly. 67 (4): 837-850. SCHWINDT-BAYER, Leslie A. 2005, The incumbency disadvantage and women's election to legislative office. Electoral Studies. 24(2): 227-244. SHVEDOVA, Nadezhda. 2005. Obstacles to Women’s Participation in Parliament. in BALLINGTON, Julie & KARAM Azza. Women in Parliament: Beyond Numbers (revised edition). Publications Office, International IDEA: 33-50. STUDLAR, Donley T. & MCALLISTER, Ian. 1991. Political recruitment to the Australian legislature: toward an explanation of women's electoral disadvantages. Western Political Quarterly. 44: 467-485. ȘTEFAN, Laurențiu & GRECU, Răzvan. 2014. The “waiting room”: Romanian Parliament after 1989. in SEMENOVA, Elena, EDINGER, Michael, BEST, Heinrich (eds.). Parliamentary elites in Central and Eastern Europe. Recruitment and represenatation. New York: Routledge: 194-307.
Online resources http://www.stiripesurse.ro/coalitia-pentru-egalitate-de-gen-aproape-o-treime-dintre-can didatii-la-parlamentare-sunt-femei_1163431.html http://parlamentare2016.bec.ro/statistici/ https://www.senat.ro/ComponentaComisii.aspx?Zi=&ComisieID=F3E4672C-E333-44E0-B 781-70D7F273EE1C https://www.senat.ro/ComponentaComisii.aspx?Zi=&ComisieID=1A267697-1233-4582-B 49A-39B610B70DA2 http://www.2016bec.ro/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Lege-208-2015.pdf http://revista22.ro/70250907/inscop-doar-128--dintre-romni-au-incredere-n-parlament-86 --au-incredere-n-partide.html
64
OANA BĂLUȚĂ
http://www.psd.ro/media/stiri/liviu-dragnea-candidatii-psd-la-alegerile-parlamentare-al esi-in-baza-criteriilor-de-performanta http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-alegeri_parlamentare_2016-21382628-lista-completa-numele -candidatilor-psd-alegerile-parlamentare-dragnea-ponta-mai-vor-mandat.htm http://www.cotidianul.ro/femeile-din-psd-zid-in-jurul-lui-liviu-dragnea-302508/ http://adevarul.ro/news/politica/scandal-parlament-deputatul-psd-nicolae-bacalbasa-fac ut-gesturi-obscene-afirmatii-jignitoare-faci-fractura-mai-dai-labele-1_5911a2445ab 6550cb8eecb0e/index.html http://epochtimes-romania.com/news/scandal-la-primaria-capitalei-usr-anunta-plangerepenala-pentru-agresarea-a-trei-consiliere---259269 http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=7466&idm=1,006&idl=1. https://www.romania-insider.com/romania-ranks-last-in-the-eu-on-equality-between-me n-and-women/
