Election Day is almost here! Whether you’re preparing to celebrate or ready to cry from campaign exhaustion, I hope you’re going to take the opportunity to vote on November 6^th. I’m always shocked and a little disappointed when a woman tells me that she’s not planning on voting. And then I break out my top five reasons for why she should:

5. 113-plus years of suffrage in the United States. For women, the road to the voting booth was long and arduous. Suffragists took on presidents, the states, Congress, law enforcement officers, and citizens who thought that a person could be unequal, unworthy and incapable of participating in elections, simply because she was a woman. For women of color and those living in poverty, the road to enfranchisement was even longer and tougher. Vote for hunger strikes and forced feedings. Vote for humiliation and bravery. Vote to honor the people who came before you and righted a wrong; vote to show those who will come after you that there is strength and power in casting a ballot.

4. Your vote DOES count. The Electoral College and the media calling races before the polls even close can make voting feel more symbolic than effective. But whether you live in a swing state or not, your vote will have an impact, particularly when it comes to local laws and policies. While the presidential election has overshadowed just about everything else, there are other races and initiatives to vote for. Click here to find out what’s on the ballot in DC, here to see what Marylanders are voting for, and here to see what’s on the ballot in Virginia. Vote because you care about what happens in your community.

3. Improve and increase resources for women and their families. Women – particularly single women raising children – remain more economically vulnerable, even as the country begins to recover from the recession. According to research from the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), women were either breadwinners or co-breadwinners in most families. Yet, women make up nearly two-thirds of minimum wage workers, earn 77 cents for every dollar paid to their male counterparts, and low-income families are mostly headed by single mothers. “By voting, women can make sure our elected leaders prioritize investments that will help women and their families through hard times, expand opportunity, and strengthen the economy,” says NWLC. Vote because stronger, more resilient women create stronger, more resilient families and communities.

2. “There never will be complete equality until women themselves help to make laws and elect lawmakers.” —Susan B. Anthony

1. Your vote is your voice. Lawmakers listen to voters long after Election Day – it could be their key to getting re-elected in the future. Vote because you want to have a say in your future and in the community in which you live.

There are many, many other reasons to vote, but the ones I listed are what I’ll be thinking about on November 6^th. Please share your own reasons in the comments below. And please, please make sure that you vote on Tuesday. To find out where your polling place is, click on your location: DC, MD, VA.

Images courtesy of the National Women’s Law Center.

I know a lot has already been written about what was said by both candidates at this week’s presidential debate, but I have to say, I’m more struck by what wasn’t said.  Has it become taboo for candidates to discuss poverty in America? Do both candidates really believe that beefing up educational opportunity is the panacea for addressing the plight of the one in six Americans living in poverty?  No discussion of safety nets. No discussion of the children who face food insecurity every day. No discussion of the increasing number of homeless families in America. No discussion of raising the minimum wage. Almost no discussion of quality child care options for low-income women.

In fact, Mr. Romney assured his supporters that the wealthy would continue to pay 60% of our country’s taxes while middle-class citizens would see their tax bills slashed. By my reckoning, that leaves only the poor to make up for what the middle-class is no longer burdened with. Is anyone else simultaneously outraged, puzzled, and incredulous at the thinking behind this?

President Obama, while chastising his opponent on his 47% gaffe, carefully mentioned only the “deserving” poor who fit into this category. Is he tacitly acknowledging that there are undeserving poor whom it’s actually okay to ignore?

I understand that these are politicians and the point of debates is to win votes. Knowing that both men employ very smart people who have researched just what messaging will resonate with voters, it concerns me that making sure as a society we are committed to taking care of our most vulnerable members doesn’t seem to be even a blip on the radar.

Donna is the executive assistant to the president at the Foundation.

Usually I’m not one to get into politics too deeply, but when I heard last month on the radio that a presidential candidate said that “Really poor children, in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works so they have no habit of showing up on Monday. They have no habit of staying all day, they have no habit of ‘I do this and you give me cash’ unless it is illegal.”  The candidate went on to say that poor children should work as janitors in their schools to build confidence and pride within themselves and their schools.  I had to find out who was behind this thoughtless comment. So I commenced to Google this statement and a Mr. Newt Gingrich came up.

As I started to read and learn more about him, I became weary of his perception of those living in communities that are more economically vulnerable than others because if this is how one addresses an issue in public, I’m scared to hear what he really thinks about these communities in private.  I will agree that this is a real life issue that needs to be mended but I truly don’t believe it should be done in the manner Mr. Gingrich is suggesting.  I don’t think his other plan of making an Apprentice reality show with Donald Trump using “very poor children” from in the New York City Public School system will make the issue any better either.

I’m glad to hear that Mr. Gingrich has noticed that there is a quality-of-life problem in those communities, but to address it in such a manner is (in my eyes) unacceptable.  Children should not be put to work before their time.  They need to be learning skills that will help them become honest, caring citizens that help contribute to the community. This can be done by having at least one person that cares in their lives; it might be a parent or someone that volunteers in a program that these impressionable children attend after school or on the weekend.  I’ve learned that if you plant a seed within a child it will indeed grow, it just depends on the person planting the seeds to harvest later in life. A child left to their own devices will learn by example and yes, unfortunately, in most economically vulnerable communities the bad apples are the role models that are easiest to access because they are always right outside the front door and the good apples take themselves out of that community and most often never return.

The election season officially kicks off in Iowa tonight and I hope that all voters – no matter what party they support – go to the caucuses and polls wanting the same thing: positive change and unity within all communities, whether they’re rich or poor.  And I hope that voters choose a candidate with a little philanthropy in his or her soul, not one who is looking just for fame and poll numbers.

Sequoia Williams is the office assistant at The Women’s Foundation.