IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/jecper/v34y2020i2p3-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Votes for Women: An Economic Perspective on Women's Enfranchisement

Author

Listed:
  • Carolyn M. Moehling
  • Melissa A. Thomasson

Abstract

The ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920 officially granted voting rights to women across the United States. However, many states extended full or partial suffrage to women before the federal amendment. In this paper, we discuss the history of women's enfranchisement using an economic lens. We examine the demand side, discussing the rise of the women's movement and its alliances with other social movements, and describe how suffragists put pressure on legislators. On the supply side, we draw from theoretical models of suffrage extension to explain why men shared the right to vote with women. Finally, we review empirical studies that attempt to distinguish between competing explanations. We find that no single theory can explain women's suffrage in the United States and note that while the Nineteenth Amendment extended the franchise to women, state-level barriers to voting limited the ability of black women to exercise that right until the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Suggested Citation

  • Carolyn M. Moehling & Melissa A. Thomasson, 2020. "Votes for Women: An Economic Perspective on Women's Enfranchisement," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 3-23, Spring.
  • Handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:34:y:2020:i:2:p:3-23
    DOI: 10.1257/jep.34.2.3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jep.34.2.3
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jep.34.2.3.ds
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1257/jep.34.2.3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John R. Lott & Jr. & Lawrence W. Kenny, 1999. "Did Women's Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(6), pages 1163-1198, December.
    2. Alessandro Lizzeri & Nicola Persico, 2004. "Why did the Elites Extend the Suffrage? Democracy and the Scope of Government, with an Application to Britain's "Age of Reform"," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 707-765.
    3. McDonagh, Eileen L. & Price, H. Douglas, 1985. "Woman Suffrage in the Progressive Era: Patterns of Opposition and Support in Referenda Voting, 1910-1918," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 79(2), pages 415-435, June.
    4. Moehling, Carolyn M. & Thomasson, Melissa A., 2012. "The Political Economy of Saving Mothers and Babies: The Politics of State Participation in the Sheppard-Towner Program," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(1), pages 75-103, March.
    5. Khan, B. Zorina, 1996. "Married Women's Property Laws and Female Commercial Activity: Evidence from United States Patent Records, 1790–1895," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(2), pages 356-388, June.
    6. Jones, Ethel B, 1991. "The Economics of Woman Suffrage," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 423-437, June.
    7. Braun, Sebastian & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2013. "Men, women, and the ballot: Gender imbalances and suffrage extensions in the United States," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 405-426.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Scott Alan Carson, 2023. "Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Century Social Feminism and Women’s Suffrage: A Female–Male Net Nutrition Comparison using Differences- in-decompositions," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 35(2), pages 191-215, July.
    2. Hiller, Victor & Touré, Nouhoum, 2021. "Endogenous gender power: The two facets of empowerment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    3. Stahl, Jörg R., 2023. "Changes in the electorate and firm values: Evidence from the introduction of female suffrage in Switzerland," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 386-402.
    4. Scott A. Carson, 2021. "The Changing Antebellum Period through Early 20th Century Net Nutrition between Male and Females: A Difference-In-Decompositions within and across Group Comparison," CESifo Working Paper Series 9402, CESifo.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carolyn Moehling & Melissa A. Thomasson, 2020. "Votes For Women: An Economic Perspective on Women’s Enfranchisement," NBER Working Papers 26781, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt, 2009. "Women's Liberation: What's in It for Men?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1541-1591.
    3. Bertocchi, Graziella, 2011. "The enfranchisement of women and the welfare state," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 535-553, May.
    4. Michèle Tertilt & Matthias Doepke & Anne Hannusch & Laura Montenbruck, 2022. "The Economics of Women’s Rights," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(6), pages 2271-2316.
    5. Braun, Sebastian & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2013. "Men, women, and the ballot: Gender imbalances and suffrage extensions in the United States," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 405-426.
    6. Braun, Sebastian & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2010. "Men, women, and the ballot: Gender imbalances and suffrage extensions in US states," Kiel Working Papers 1625, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    7. Anna Maria Koukal & Reiner Eichenberger, 2017. "Explaining a Paradox of Democracy: The Role of Institutions in Female Enfranchisement," CREMA Working Paper Series 2017-13, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    8. Kose, Esra & Kuka, Elira & Shenhav, Na'ama, 2016. "Women's Enfranchisement and Children's Education: The Long-Run Impact of the U.S. Suffrage Movement," IZA Discussion Papers 10148, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Moshe Hazan & David Weiss & Hosny Zoabi, 2019. "Women's Liberation as a Financial Innovation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 74(6), pages 2915-2956, December.
    10. Aidt, T.S. & Eterovic, D.S., 2007. "Give and Take: Political Competition, Participation and Public Finance in 20th Century Latin America," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0714, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    11. Fernández, Raquel, 2009. "Women's Rights and Development," CEPR Discussion Papers 7464, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Elizabeth U. Cascio & Na'ama Shenhav, 2020. "A Century of the American Woman Voter: Sex Gaps in Political Participation, Preferences, and Partisanship since Women's Enfranchisement," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 24-48, Spring.
    13. Raquel Fernández, 2014. "Women’s rights and development," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 37-80, March.
    14. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt & Alessandra Voena, 2012. "The Economics and Politics of Women's Rights," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 339-372, July.
    15. Alberto Batinti & Joan Costa‐Font & Timothy J. Hatton, 2022. "Voting Up? The Effects of Democracy and Franchise Extension on Human Stature," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(353), pages 161-190, January.
    16. Carolyn Moehling & Melissa Thomasson, 2014. "Saving Babies: The Impact of Public Education Programs on Infant Mortality," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 51(2), pages 367-386, April.
    17. Carolyn M. Moehling & Melissa A. Thomasson, 2012. "Saving Babies: The Contribution of Sheppard-Towner to the Decline in Infant Mortality in the 1920s," NBER Working Papers 17996, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Rainald Borck, 2018. "Political Participation and the Welfare State," CESifo Working Paper Series 7128, CESifo.
    19. Sebastian Braun & Michael Kvasnicka, 2009. "Men, Women, and the Ballot Woman Suffrage in the United States," SFB 649 Discussion Papers SFB649DP2009-016, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
    20. Raquel Fernández, 2009. "Women's Rights and Development," NBER Working Papers 15355, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • K10 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - General (Constitutional Law)
    • K16 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Election Law
    • N42 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation - - - U.S.; Canada: 1913-

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:34:y:2020:i:2:p:3-23. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.