Anna Mitchell Mahoney earned a B.A. from Loyola University in Mass Communications, a M.A. in Women’s Studies from the University of Alabama, and a Ph.D. in Political Science from Rutgers University. She joined the Newcomb College Institute at Tulane University as an Administrative Assistant Professor of Women’s Political Leadership in August 2014. In 2016, she became Director of Research for the Institute. She has taught a range of courses at the university level including Introduction to Women’s Studies, American Government, Congressional Politics, American Race Relations, and Women and American Politics. Anna is a member of several community organizations including the Women United of Southeast Louisiana United Way, American Association of University Women, the League of Women’s Voters, and was named in 2016 to the Louisiana Women's Policy & Research Commission. She holds an executive committee position with Women United of United Way SELA and sits on the board of The Public Leadership Education Network (PLEN).
Gender and Politics
Networks And Politics
Political Parties and Interest Groups
State and Local Politics
Women's Legislative Caucuses
Gendered Public Policy
As a scholar, my research interests focus on the intersection between identity and representation. I am particularly interested in how individuals negotiate their multiple identities in political contexts, especially within legislatures. My book, Women Take Their Place in State Legislatures: The Creation of Women’s Caucuses (Temple University Press, 2018), investigates the role gender and political party play in women’s ability to act collectively on behalf of themselves and their constituents. Additionally, I have co-authored a series of papers with my colleague Mirya Holman on the influence of women’s caucuses on collaboration within legislatures. All of these projects concern gendered institutions and the strategies marginalized legislators employ to succeed within them. Not surprisingly, my work with women legislators has led to an interest in the public policy produced for and by women. I have recently undertaken projects concerned with equal pay legislation, sexual harassment, as well as sexual education policy.
The marginalisation of some groups in legislative bodies promotes the construction of subaltern public spaces, including caucuses. In this paper, we evaluate whether the substantive focus of women’s caucuses in state legislatures matters in shaping women’s collaboration with each other. We first present an evaluation of the types of women’s caucuses in U.S. state legislatures, drawing on qualitative examples and evidence from founding efforts. We then evaluate whether it matters if a caucus is focused on social cohesion among women, sets policy agendas, or is has ad hoc policy focus. We theorise that the focus of the caucus should not matter, as it is the existence of the subaltern space (versus the absence of the space) that confers trust and collaboration among members. Using all co-sponsorship behaviour between women legislators in every U.S. state legislature in 2015, we find little evidence of consistent patterns of a type of caucus mattering across institutional arrangements; instead, all caucuses increase collaborative patterns. Our findings provide evidence for the importance of institutional arrangements that build trust and cooperation in increasingly polarised and divided legislative bodies.
Women have organized around their gendered identity to accomplish political goals both inside and outside legislatures. Formal and informal institutional norms shape the form this collective action takes and whether it is successful. What, then, are the favorable conditions for organizing women’s caucuses inside legislatures? Using an original dataset and employing an event history analysis, we identify the institutional conditions under which women’s caucuses emerged in the 50 US states from 1972 to 2009. Within a feminist institutional framework, we argue that women’s ability to alter existing organizational structures and potentially affect gender norms within legislatures is contextual. Although we find that women’s presence in conjunction with Democratic Party control partially explains women’s ability to act collectively and in a bipartisan way within legislatures, our analysis suggests that institutional-level variables are not enough to untangle this complicated phenomenon. Our work explains how gender and party interact to shape legislative behavior and clarifies the intractability of institutional norms while compelling further qualitative evidence to uncover the best conditions for women’s collective action within legislatures.
Collaboration plays a key role in crafting good public policy. We use a novel data set of over 140,000 pieces of legislation considered in US state legislatures in 2015 to examine the factors associated with women’s collaboration with each other. We articulate a theory that women’s collaboration arises from opportunity structures, dictated by an interaction of individual and institutional characteristics. Examining the effect of a combination of characteristics, we find support for an interactive view of institutions, where women’s caucuses accelerate collaboration in Democratic‐controlled bodies and as the share of women increases. Collaboration between women also continues in the face of increased polarization in the presence of a caucus, but not absent one. Our findings speak to the long‐term consequences of electing women to political office, the importance of institutions and organizations in shaping legislative behavior, and the institutionalization of gender in politics.
How do women strategically make their mark on state legislatures? Anna Mitchell Mahoney’s book traces the development of women’s state legislative caucuses and the influence both gender and party have on women’s ability to organize collectively. She provides a comprehensive analysis of how and why women organize around their gender identity in state legislatures—or why they do not. Women Take Their Place in State Legislatures includes a quantitative analysis of institutional-level variables and caucus existence in all 50 states. Case studies of caucus attempts in New Jersey, Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Iowa between 2006 and 2010 examine attempts at creating women’s caucuses that succeeded or failed, and why. Mahoney’s interviews with 180 state legislators and their staff explore the motivations of caucus creators and participants. Ultimately, she finds that women’s organizing is contextual; it demonstrates the dynamic nature of gender. Mahoney also provides insights into broad questions regarding gendered institutions, collective action, and political party governance. Women Take Their Place in State Legislatures fills a lacuna in the evaluation of women in government.
Interview regarding the Maternal and Child Health Coalition and advocacy in the New Orleans City Council.
Interview regarding equal pay and policy advocacy in Louisiana.
"Mu je res, las pro ta go nis tas en elec ción de EU" Victor Sancho
"2,200 Women Who Ran for Oce in 2018 Lost. What’s Next for Them? Linda Kramer Jenning
“Record Numbers of Women in State Legislatures: Caucuses will Help Them Get Work Done,”
“The Continued Importance of the ‘Bros Caucus’ Underscores the Need for More Women’s Caucuses,”
“One More Time,” Scholars have long lamented the lack of women candidates for public office. Attempts to recruit women candidates have been widespread, targeting older women with empty nests, younger women without children (or those not interested in having them), lawyers and businesswomen whose experience mirrors that of typical male candidates. But another pool is waiting to be tapped: losers, women who have previously run for office but did not win.
Editorial: “Now is Time to Boost Paid Family Leave, and These Louisiana Representatives Can Help.”