The Politics of the President's Wife

6. Conclusion

6 Conclusion First ladies confront extraordinary responsibilities. They are expected to use, interpret, and make symbols that will facilitate communications and relationships among the public and their husbands’ administrations. They are perceived as gender role models and charged with winning the support of moderates, while sustaining the loyalty of their own party’s base. They are critiqued as policy and political entrepreneurs, expected to facilitate change in social norms and government priorities. Being first lady is difficult, exhausting , and meaningful. Contributing to these challenges is the intense sense of identification that the general public—women, especially—express in regard to the presidents ’ wives. Among other pieces of evidence, the public correspondence collections in the presidential libraries contain innumerable letters, notes, and telegrams whose authors convey their thoughts with an easy familiarity. Whether requesting help or guidance, commenting on the first lady’s recent actions, or advising her on impending decisions, these correspondents write as if they are personally acquainted with the president’s wife. That same comfortable intimacy surfaced repeatedly in conversations about my research. Almost invariably, people would volunteer which first lady was their “favorite ” and would then proceed to tell stories about that particular woman. The president’s wives are known; the public feels that they are known well. Perhaps not surprisingly, the presidents’ wives have found themselves with bewildering coalitions of supporters and critics. Modern first ladies have negotiated gender through several women’s and civil rights movements; partisanship through realignment, dealignment, and polarization; and presidential politics through institutional shifts in the White House, social and economic upheaval, and war. Even so, their communication and relationship building has consisted of more than coping strategies in contentious and difficult times. Their political expertise has evidenced considerable self- conclusion 195 awareness, prioritizing responsiveness while strengthening the connections between gender and partisanship. The Women Who Have Been the Modern First Ladies The wives of the modern presidents have, as discussed in the second chapter , entered the White House with significant political expertise. Most commonly , they have exhibited a hard-won strategic understanding of campaigning and governing, having participated in their husbands’ campaigns and then closely observing (if not continuing their participation in) their husbands ’ governance. Only Lou Henry Hoover and Mamie Doud Eisenhower were introduced to political campaigning when their husbands ran for the presidency, and their experiences are unlikely to be repeated in the future. With governors and U.S. senators considered the strongest prospects for the Oval Office, first ladies will likely have experiences and credentials similar to those of Eleanor Roosevelt, Rosalynn Smith Carter, Nancy Davis Reagan, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Laura Welch Bush, all first ladies in their home states, or Bess Wallace Truman, Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy, Lady Bird Taylor Johnson, and Michelle Robinson Obama, all senators’ wives. States’ first ladies have tested their skills and strategies of representation, especially in regard to substantive representation, before coming to Washington. Senators ’ wives have often been more knowledgeable about the Washington community and Washington society. The different kinds and degrees of knowledge possessed by the women have been evident in their successes and their failures. Carter and Rodham Clinton epitomized the experiences of the governors’ wives who became first ladies. Carter’s facilitation of mental health-care reform could be attributed to her lengthy apprenticeship in its policy networks, and to her experiences in seeing policy change negotiated in a state with a will to effect change, despite its past reputation for poor care and its limited financial resources. Rodham Clinton’s failure in health-care insurance reform, similarly, was attributed to her lack of familiarity with the associated networks and negotiations. As first lady in Arkansas, she had conducted extensive public outreach and acquired significant policy expertise, but her husband in the capital had conducted the negotiations that resulted in programmatic change. Among the senators’ wives, Kennedy and Johnson were particularly illustrative. Kennedy used White House resources to reach out to cultural elites, including donors 196 chapter 6 and museum curators, and Johnson used White House resources to contact officeholders and voters. These were constituents with whom the first ladies had previous relationships and with whom they could cultivate a shared identity. As these examples demonstrated, the women whose husbands became president did have to learn to be first ladies, but they brought experiences and expertise into the White House that eased that learning throughout the...