The USA Today article of this title is available here. Below is an excerpt:
… In a study completed last month, a Yale researcher found that male congressmen with daughters are more likely to support women’s issues than those without daughters.
The findings, an update to a study published last year by the National Bureau of Economic Research, also show that the more daughters a congressman had, the more likely he was to vote for reproductive rights, says Ebonya Washington, an assistant economics professor at Yale.
Her new research, not yet published, expands on an analysis she did of roll-call votes during the 105th Congress in 1997-98 when she examined family composition and compared the data with voting records compiled by other groups. She used rankings by the National Organization for Women, based on votes on 20 women’s issues such as equal rights, women’s safety, economic security, education, health and reproductive rights. She also reviewed voting data from the National Right to Life Committee.
Her new analysis included congressional votes through 2004 and added information from another group: the American Association of University Women. She again found voting record support for a daughter-to-father influence. …
Though I think this effect is quite plausible, I don’t think this study provides very good evidence for it. How do we know the effect takes place at the level of changing congresscritters’ views rather than, e.g., at the level of voters being more willing to vote for pro-choice politicians with daughters than pro-choice politicians without daughters?
in the end, when gems lose their brilliance, when gold loses it’s luster and the throneroom becomes a prison, all that’s left is the love of a parent for a child……………………………………(paraphrased from Conan the Barbarian)