HOW THE LEAGUE OPERATES
NONPARTISANSHIP
The idea of an organization that is both political and nonpartisan may seem contradictory, but the League has done it well for many years. Our nonpartisanship was inspired by the experience of the women's suffrage movement - clearly, women needed support of men in both parties to win the right to vote. After gaining this right, leaders in the suffrage movement considered two options: founding a separate political party for women or forming a group that could work toward certain political goals and legislation, as well as educating all citizens on voting while working within existing political organizations. As we know, the League's founders decided on the latter option, though it was not until the mid-1930s that nonpartisanship was institutionalized in the LWV.
Nonpartisan status allows us to work effectively in voter education. The community knows that candidates' meetings and the Voters Guide will present information without bias. We educate high school students about the voting process, and help with voting machine instruction and registration, because the community knows that we will be fair in our presentations. We also take positions on political issues after careful study, and work to achieve change, based on our knowledge. We never support political candidates or parties, nor do we do things that would appear to support one over another.
While the League is nonpartisan as an organization, its members are encouraged to be active in politics and their political party as long as they act for themselves, and never in the name of the League. Members of the League with publicly known political affiliations should not be involved in activities such as registering voters, observing public meetings for the League, or participating in candidate meetings sponsored by the League. Board members are not permitted to run for or hold political office or campaign publicly for political candidates.
LEAGUE PROGRAM AND POSITIONS
League members often refer to program or programs at local, state and national levels. We need to be careful about that final "s" on the word, though, for the two terms mean very different things in the context of League. If we talk about programs, the term has its customary meaning of plans for speakers, discussions, or activities that we might undertake at particular meetings (e.g. the programs at our lunch line forums feature speakers, followed by a period of questions and answers.) However, when we talk about League program, we refer to the selected governmental issues that members at local, state, or national levels have chosen for study and action. Members participate in selecting and studying program issues, thus preserving the grassroots tradition of the League. Existing local program (found in the report of the Annual Meeting) is adopted at each annual meeting; new program may be adopted at the same time. Existing program of state and national Leagues is adopted by delegates to their conventions. This periodic (re)adoption of program items ensures that current members continue to support these items for study and action.
League positions, that is, the statements of the League's point of view on an issue, are reached through objective member study of an issue, and agreement on it (through either consensus or concurrence), and then approved by the appropriate board. Positions are used as a basis for League action on that issue. Consensus represents the collective opinion of a substantial number of League members who are representative of the membership as a whole; it is reached through discussion and not by a simple vote. Members who differ with the consensus may ask to have a minority opinion noted. Sometimes League members are asked for concurrence, or agreement with a position on an issue that has been reached by a small group of members or by members of another League. Concurrence takes place after careful review of study materials, and concurrence by a substantial number can lead to a position by a wider League group.
Note: Thanks to the LWVUS website for assistance in defining these terms.
A PAGE FROM WOMEN’S HISTORY
As I watched the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association (PIAA)
swimming championships at Bucknell last year, I understood how normal the
scene appeared to parents, swimmers, and coaches. But my thoughts were different.
I marveled at how far female high school athletes have come since 1973 when
the LWVPA entered a sex discrimination lawsuit on the side of the Commonwealth
against PIAA.
At the time, PIAA’s bylaws did not permit girls to “compete
or practice against boys in any athletic contest,” and sports opportunities
for girls were slim compared to those for boys. Because of PIAA’s
influential relationship with public schools, the state had standing to
sue this private association. The League’s interest in the lawsuit
was to develop judicial precedent for the new state ERA, which voters approved
in a 1971 referendum.
This case came along when League members nationwide were lobbying state
legislatures to ratify the federal ERA, and working overtime to implement
Title IX. When the Supreme Court legalized abortion in 1973, significant
opposition to women’s rights took hold. ERA ratification slowed, and
Title IX’s 1972 mandate of equity for females in education became
more contentious than its advocates ever imagined.
But we won the argument in Pennsylvania! In a 1975 opinion by Genevieve
Blatt, Commonwealth Court decided against PIAA. In finding that PIAA’s
bylaws violated the state ERA, Judge Blatt added: “our legal system
has taken one attribute of females, their physical structure and potential
for child bearing…as persuasive enough to effect the legal rights
of all women, even where the rights…have no relationship to their
physical structure e.g. denying women the right to vote or serve on juries.”
Judge Blatt (1913-1996), a long time LWV member, was the first female appellate
court judge in Pennsylvania.
There is a Lewisburg twist to the story, involving Graham Showalter and
me. As the LWVPA board member responsible for our case, I had to find an
attorney. I remembered that Showalter lost a suit against PIAA a few years
earlier. He represented Lynn Purnell, the outstanding player on the Lewisburg
Area High School golf team, who was prohibited from participating in PIAA
events. Lynn was not the only casualty; her team also suffered because the
boys couldn’t win without her! Attorney Showalter agreed to represent
the League pro bono. I drafted the brief and he polished it with appropriate
legal language on court-approved paper. I took the required number of copies
to Harrisburg and filed them in Commonwealth Court with the help of my LWVPA
colleague Marlene Berman, who knew how to navigate the corridors, blind
alleys, and gatekeepers in the state Capitol Building.
History was made for high school girls and for the PIAA, which surely has
benefited from the explosion in women’s sports and the emergence of
outstanding athletic talent that was hidden for far too long.
Nancy Neuman