Wardrobing Women Candidates

The Politico website today splashed this headline, "RNC shells out $150K for Palin fashion," which quickly became the most emailed story on Yahoo! news. It makes a predictably bad impression for the Palin camp, by comparing the outlays for high-end retailers, as well as almost five grand for hair and makeup, to John Edwards' $400 haircut and other famous political follies. It also notes no comparable expenses in the financial statements for the Obama campaign, which is surely better able to afford it.

Also circulating widely is this AP story, that significant Alaska public funds have been spent on hotels and airfare for the Palin kids during their mom's short term in office.There is a distinct whiff of abuse of power in the AP story. But the wardrobe story raises a different issue without addressing it: Women in the spotlight face higher expectations for their appearance than men do. Palin comes from a beauty pageant background, and has traded on her looks to attract (literally) political supporters. Call it the Princess Di candidacy, and expect it to have higher maintenance costs.

The relevant comparison is not with Obama's campaign, but Hillary Clinton's. The "traveling pantsuits" that became iconic during primary season presumably cost less than Palin's outlay, but still probably much more than Obama's or McCain's wardrobe. A man can run for office with a pair of shoes, 2 suits, 3 shirts, and 4 ties. No woman seeking public office could do the same. But if we don't want to end up where only Princess Di or Evita Perron can get elected, we'd better make peace with the pantsuits.