Women legislators fight for ‘potty parity'
Advertisement
'You get the message very quickly: This place was not really built for us,' said Rep. Lisa Willner, a Democrat from Louisville, reflecting on the photos of former lawmakers, predominantly male, that line her office.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
The issue of potty parity may seem comic, but its impact runs deeper than uncomfortably full bladders, said Kathryn Anthony, professor emerita at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's School of Architecture.
'It's absolutely critical because the built environment reflects our culture and reflects our population,' said Anthony, who has testified on the issue before Congress. 'And if you have an environment that is designed for half the population but forgets about the other half, you have a group of disenfranchised people and disadvantaged people.'
There is hope for Kentucky's lady legislators seeking more chamber potties.
Advertisement
A $300 million renovation of the 155-year-old Capitol — scheduled for completion by 2028 at the soonest — aims to create more women's restrooms and end Kentucky's bathroom disparity.
The Bluegrass State is among the last to add bathrooms to aging statehouses that were built when female legislators were not a consideration.
In the $392 million renovation of the Georgia Capitol, expanding bathroom access is a priority, said Gerald Pilgrim, chief of staff with the state's Building Authority. It will introduce female facilities on the building's fourth floor, where the public galleries are located, and will add more bathrooms throughout to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
'We know there are not enough bathrooms,' he said.
Evolving equality in statehouses
There's no federal law requiring bathroom access for all genders in public buildings. Some 20 states have statutes prescribing how many washrooms buildings must have, but historical buildings — such as statehouses — are often exempt.
Over the years, as the makeup of state governments has changed, statehouses have added bathrooms for women.
When Tennessee's Capitol opened in 1859, the architects designed only one restroom — for men only — situated on the ground floor. According to legislative librarian Eddie Weeks, the toilet could only be 'flushed' when enough rainwater had been collected.
'The room was famously described as 'a stench in the nostrils of decency,'' Weeks said in an email.
Today, Tennessee's Capitol has a female bathroom located between the Senate and House chambers. It's in a cramped hall under a staircase, sparking comparisons to Harry Potter's cupboard bedroom, and it contains just two stalls. The men also just have one bathroom on the same floor, but it has three urinals and three stalls.
Advertisement
Democratic Rep. Aftyn Behn, who was elected in 2023, said she wasn't aware of the disparity in facilities until contacted by The Associated Press.
'I've apparently accepted that waiting in line for a two-stall closet under the Senate balcony is just part of the job,' she said.
'I had to fight to get elected to a legislature that ranks dead last for female representation, and now I get to squeeze into a space that feels like it was designed by someone who thought women didn't exist -- or at least didn't have bladders,' Behn said.
The Maryland State House is the country's oldest state capitol in continuous legislative use, operational since the late 1700s. Archivists say its bathroom facilities were initially intended for white men only because desegregation laws were still in place. Women's restrooms were added after 1922, but they were insufficient for the rising number of women elected to office.
Delegate Pauline Menes complained about the issue so much that House Speaker Thomas Lowe appointed her chair of the 'Ladies Rest Room Committee,' and presented her with a fur covered toilet seat in front of her colleagues in 1972. She launched the women's caucus the following year.
It wasn't until 2019 that House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones, the first woman to secure the top position, ordered the addition of more women's restrooms along with a gender-neutral bathroom and a nursing room for mothers in the Lowe House Office Building.
'No longer do we fret and squirm or cross our legs in panic'
As more women were elected nationwide in the 20th century, some found creative workarounds.
In Nebraska's unicameral Legislature, female senators didn't get a dedicated restroom until 1988, when a facility was added in the chamber's cloakroom. There had previously been a single restroom in the senate lounge, and Sen. Shirley Marsh, who served for some 16 years, would ask a State Patrol trooper to guard the door while she used it, said Brandon Metzler, the Legislature's clerk.
Advertisement
In Colorado, female House representatives and staff were so happy to have a restroom added in the chamber's hallway in 1987 that they hung a plaque to honor then-state Rep. Arie Taylor, the state's first Black woman legislator, who pushed for the facility.
The plaque, now inside a women's bathroom in the Capitol, reads: 'Once here beneath the golden dome if nature made a call, we'd have to scramble from our seats and dash across the hall ... Then Arie took the mike once more to push an urge organic, no longer do we fret and squirm or cross our legs in panic.'
The poem concludes: 'In mem'ry of you, Arie (may you never be forgot), from this day forth we'll call that room the Taylor Chamber Pot.'
New Mexico Democratic state Rep. Liz Thomson recalled missing votes in the House during her first year in office in 2013 because there was no women's restroom in the chamber's lounge. An increase in female lawmakers — New Mexico elected the largest female majority Legislature in U.S. history in 2024 — helped raise awareness of the issue, she said.
'It seems kind of like fluff, but it really isn't,' she said. 'To me, it really talks about respect and inclusion.'
The issue is not exclusive to statehouses. In the U.S. Capitol, the first restroom for congresswomen didn't open until 1962. While a facility was made available for female U.S. Senators in 1992, it wasn't until 2011 that the House chamber opened a bathroom to women lawmakers.
Advertisement
Jeannette Rankin of Montana was the first woman elected to a congressional seat. That happened in 1916.
Willner insists that knowing the Kentucky Capitol wasn't designed for women gives her extra impetus to stand up and make herself heard.
'This building was not designed for me,' she said. 'Well, guess what? I'm here.'
Associated Press writer Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Politics without shame: Gerrymandering makes hypocrisy a political punch line
Former diplomat and Democratic senator Adlai Stevenson once remarked that 'a hypocrite is the kind of politician who would cut down a redwood tree, then mount the stump and make a speech for conservation.' If so, this week in politics was nothing but the worst form of stump speeches. In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) declared that the move by Texas Republicans to redistrict mid-decade was a 'legal insurrection of our U.S. Capitol.' In Texas, Democratic State Rep. Jolanda Jones (D) must have felt 'insurrection' did not quite capture the infamy. Instead, she insisted, 'I will liken this to the Holocaust.' Others repeated the Democratic mantra that it was the death of democracy. That includes former President Barack Obama, who had said nothing when Democrats made his own state the most gerrymandered in the union. In Illinois, surrounded by Texas legislators who had fled their state to prevent a legislative quorum, Gov. JB Pritzker (D) bellowed that gerrymandering was an attempt to 'steal' congressional seats and to 'disenfranchise people.' It did not matter that the stump Pritzker and Texas Democrats were standing on in Chicago is located the most gerrymandered state in the country. The redistricting law, signed by Pritzker left Republicans with just three of the state's 17 congressional seats, even though they won nearly half the votes in the last election. What is missing in any of this is any sense of shame. The most telling moment came when Pritzker went on the Stephen Colbert's show on CBS — a show that offered him a reliably supportive audience and a long track record of 86 percent of jokes slamming conservatives or Republicans. Pritzker received roaring cheers when he said that he was protecting democracy from Texas gerrymandering. Colbert then showed him the map of Illinois, which features ridiculously shaped, snaking districts that stretch across the state — all drawn to maximize Democratic performance in elections. Pritzker just shrugged and joked how they had kindergarteners design it. Colbert and the audience laughed uproariously. So let's recap. Pritzker had just declared gerrymandering a threat to democracy. He followed up by making a joke of his own unparalleled gerrymandering. The New York audience cheered both statements. Some of the outrage by Democrats seemed part of a comedy routine. In Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healey pledged to retaliate by gerrymandering her heavily gerrymandered state. The problem? It is already so badly gerrymandered that there are no Republican House members in the state — there haven't been any since the 1990s. We have reached the point in our age of rage where one's hypocrisy can be openly acknowledged but then dismissed with a chuckle. It is not cheap to lock Republicans out completely in heavily Democratic states. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) quickly pledged to order a new round of gerrymandering in a state where Republicans constituted roughly 40 percent of the congressional vote in 2024 but received only about 17 percent of the House seats. To reduce the Republicans to near zero would require passage of a ballot proposition, costing more than $200 million, even as California faces a budget crisis and a deficit greater than $20 billion. And that may prove to be just a fraction of the true cost. In response to the gerrymandering, Democratic strategist James Carville seemed to call for what Texas State House Democratic Caucus Chair Gene Wu (who fled to Illinois) described as ' launching nukes at each other.' Carville insisted that once the Democrats retake power, they should 'unilaterally add Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia as states' and pack the Supreme Court to guarantee that the Republicans can never win again. He is not the first Democrat to openly advocate such a plan. In an October 2020 interview, Harvard law professor Michael Klarman explained how Democrats needed to use their power to enact 'democracy-entrenching legislation,' which would ensure that 'the Republican Party will never win another election.' Perhaps you can appreciate the unintended humor there. But Professor Klarman noted that Democrats would still have to gain control of the Supreme Court to make such legislation stick. What is striking about the Carville interview is that he was describing rigging both the legislative and judicial branches, all in the name of democracy. Carville admitted that 'in isolation,' each of these ideas may be objectionable and open 'Pandora's box.' However, when done together, they somehow become acceptable. It is akin to saying that burning a home is arson, but torching a city is urban renewal. Nevertheless, Carville declared: 'If you want to save democracy, I think you got to do all of those things because we just are moving further and further away from being anything close to democracy.' Again, no one listening to such unhinged ranting would fail to see the hypocrisy. What is chilling is that no one really cares. You can stack the Supreme Court and the Congress. You can gerrymander legislative and congressional maps. You can even engage in ballot cleansing by barring Republican and third-party candidates from elections. You can do all of that and still claim to be righteously defending democracy. You can even commit the most venal acts as a form of virtue signaling … even though there is not a scintilla of virtue in what you are saying. There may be one benefit to Carville and his counterparts in opening up Pandora's Box. In the story, Pandora released an array of evils on the world, including sorrow, disease, vice, violence, greed, madness, old age, and death. However, few recall the last thing to escape the jar and perhaps the thing that the vengeful Zeus least wanted humanity to have: hope. It is possible that citizens will finally get fed up listening to these self-righteous hypocrites and join together to end gerrymandering once and for all. Rather than yield to our rage, reason could still prevail in this country in barring or at least limiting partisan redistricting. When we do that, these clear-cutting politicians will not have a stump to stand on.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Cuomo bashes ‘rich person' Mamdani for hogging $2,300 from homeless New Yorkers
Democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani is a 'rich person' hogging affordable housing from homeless New Yorkers — and it's 'time to move out,' ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo wrote in a scathing social media post. Cuomo unleashed his tirade on X Friday alongside a video of the left nominee and frontrunner for City Hall openly admitting he pays $2,300 for a one-bedroom apartment in the high-demand neighborhood of Astoria, Queens. 'Somewhere last night in New York City, a single mother and her children slept at a homeless shelter because you, assemblyman Zohran Mamdani are occupying her rent controlled apartment,' Cuomo wrote in the viral tweet that has racked up more than 31,000 views. Zohran Mamdani pays $2,300 per month for his Astoria apartment. Brigitte Stelzer 'You grew up rich and married an even wealthier woman. You've had weddings on 3 continents. You own property in LGTBQIA+ murderous Uganda,' he continued, pointing to the politician's $142,000 base salary and the additional income his illustrator wife, Rama Duwaji, brings home. The couple married earlier this year at the City Clerk's office before jetting off for a small, but lavish Dubai engagement and wedding celebration. They capped off their nuptials with a blockbuster, three-day affair at his family's ritzy, secluded Ugandan compound, complete with masked security guards and a cellphone jamming system –– which Cuomo was quick to point out. 'No matter which way you cut it: Zohran Mamdani is a rich person. You are actually very rich. Mamdani makes a $140,000 salary as an Assemblymember. Brigitte Stelzer 'Yet you and your wife pay $2,300 a month, as you have bragged, for a nice apartment in Astoria. That should be housing for someone who needs it. We are in the middle of a historic affordability crisis. Millions of low income New Yorkers need this apartment and an apartment like it. Yet your apartment remains rented to rich people who don't need it,' Cuomo said. 'Today, I am calling on you to move out immediately and give your affordable housing back to an unhoused family who need it. Leaders must show moral clarity. Time to move out.' Mamdani had previously claimed he had plans to move out of his cheap digs. He told the New York Editorial Board in February he found the listing on StreetEasy back when he was making $47,000 per year as a foreclosure prevention housing counselor. He claimed that at the time, he had no idea it was a rent-stabilized unit. The average price of rent for a one-bedroom in the trendy Queens nabe is closer to $3,000, according to Apartment Advisor — meaning Mamdani saves an average of $8,400 per year more than his constituents. 'In that time since, I've become an assemblymember and I'm now able to pay for that apartment and able to also move out of that apartment and I plan on doing so. I don't plan on living in that apartment for perpetuity,' he said. Representatives for Mamdani did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 'The truth hurts and the truth is Mamdani is gaming a system meant to help those with way less privilege,' Cuomo spokesman Richard Azzopardi told The Post. 'I understand his diehard supporters don't know how to deal with his mask slipping,' he added, referencing backlash from Mamdani backers, 'but the comments I see are full of New Yorkers who are appalled by his hypocrisy.'
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Whitmer told Trump in private that Michigan auto jobs depend on a tariff change of course
WASHINGTON (AP) — Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer met privately in the Oval Office with President Donald Trump to make a case he did not want to hear: the automotive industry he said he wants to save were being hurt by his tariffs. The Democrat came with a slide deck to make her points in a visual presentation. Just getting the meeting last Tuesday with the Republican president was an achievement for someone viewed as a contender for her party's White House nomination in 2028. Whitmer's strategy for dealing with Trump highlights the conundrum for her and other Democratic leaders as they try to protect the interests of their states while voicing their opposition to his agenda. It's a dynamic that Whitmer has navigated much differently from many other Democratic governors. The fact that Whitmer had 'an opening to make direct appeals' in private to Trump was unique in this political moment, said Matt Grossman, a Michigan State University politics professor. It was her third meeting with Trump at the White House since he took office in January. This one, however, was far less public than the time in April when Whitmer was unwittingly part of an impromptu news conference that embarrassed her so much she covered her face with a folder. On Tuesday, she told the president that the economic damage from the tariffs could be severe in Michigan, a state that helped deliver him the White House in 2024. Whitmer also brought up federal support for recovery efforts after an ice storm and sought to delay changes to Medicaid. Trump offered no specific commitments, according to people familiar with the private conversation who were not authorized to discuss it publicly and spoke only on condition of anonymity to describe it. Whitmer is hardly the only one sounding the warning of the potentially damaging consequences, including factory job losses, lower profits and coming price increases, of the import taxes that Trump has said will be the economic salvation for American manufacturing. White House spokesman Kush Desai that no other president 'has taken a greater interest in restoring American auto industry dominance than President Trump." Trade frameworks negotiated by the administration would open up the Japanese, Korean and European markets for vehicles made on assembly lines in Michigan, Desai said. But the outreach Trump has preferred tends to be splashy presentations by tech CEOs. In the Oval Office on Wednesday, Apple CEO Tim Cook gave the president a customized glass plaque with a gold base as Cook promised $600 billion in investments. Trump claims to have brought in $17 trillion in investment commitments, although none of those numbers has surfaced yet in economic data. Under his series of executive orders and trade frameworks, U.S. automakers face import taxes of 50% on steel and aluminum, 30% on parts from China and a top rate of 25% on goods from Canada and Mexico not covered under an existing 2020 trade agreement. That puts America's automakers and parts suppliers at a disadvantage against German, Japanese and South Korean vehicles that only face a 15% import tax negotiated by Trump last month. On top of that, Trump this past week threatened a 100% tariff on computer chips, which are an integral part of cars and trucks, though he would exclude companies that produce chips domestically from the tax. Whitmer's two earlier meetings with Trump resulted in gains for Michigan. But the tariffs represent a significantly broader request of a president who has imposed them even more aggressively in the face of criticism. Materials in the presentation brought Whitmer to the meeting and obtained by The Associated Press noted how trade with Canada and Mexico has driven $23.2 billion in investment to Michigan since 2020. General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis operate 50 factories across the state, while more than 4,000 facilities support the auto parts supply chain. Altogether, the sector supports nearly 600,000 manufacturing jobs, forming the backbone of Michigan's economy. Whitmer outlined the main points of the materials to Trump and left copies with his team. To Grossman, the Michigan State professor, a key question is whether voters who expected to be helped by tariffs would react if Trump's import taxes failed to deliver the promised economic growth. 'Everyone's aware that Michigan is a critical swing state and the auto industry has outsized influence, not just directly, but symbolically,' Grossman said. AP VoteCast found that Trump won Michigan in 2024 largely because two-thirds of its voters described the economic conditions as being poor or 'not so good.' Roughly 70% of the voters in the state who felt negatively about the economy backed the Republican. The state was essentially split over whether tariffs were a positive, with Trump getting 76% of those voters who viewed them favorably. The heads of General Motors, Ford and Stellantis have repeatedly warned the administration that the tariffs would cut company profits and undermine their global competitiveness. Their efforts have resulted in little more than a temporary, monthlong pause intended to give companies time to adjust. The reprieve did little to blunt the financial fallout. In the second quarter alone, Ford reported $800 million in tariff-related costs, while GM said the import taxes cost it $1.1 billion. Those expenses could make it harder to reinvest in new domestic factories, a goal Trump has championed. 'We expect tariffs to be a net headwind of about $2 billion this year, and we'll continue to monitor the developments closely and engage with policymakers to ensure U.S. autoworkers and customers are not disadvantaged by policy change,' Ford CEO Jim Farley said on his company's earning call. Smaller suppliers have felt the strain, too. Detroit Axle, a family-run auto parts distributor, has been one of the more vocal companies in Michigan about the impact of the tariffs. The company initially announced it might have to shut down a warehouse and lay off more than 100 workers, but later said it would be able to keep the facility open, at least for now. 'Right now it's a market of who is able to survive, it's not a matter of who can thrive,' said Mike Musheinesh, owner of Detroit Axle.
