A small but vocal movement within conservative Christian circles is gaining attention for identifying what it calls a fundamental threat to American society: women voting independently. The ideology, which advocates repealing the constitutional amendment that granted women the right to vote, was recently profiled by The New York Times.
The report focused on Arizona pastor Dale Partridge, who has built a following by calling for the 19th Amendment to be replaced with a system of "household voting." Under this proposed model, each household would receive a single vote, cast by the husband. This, proponents argue, would restore what they see as a biblical family structure to the civic process.
The movement finds support in influential circles. Last summer, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth shared a clip of pastors from his denomination arguing that women should be barred from voting. Anti-abortion activist Abby Johnson, a speaker at the 2020 Republican National Convention, has also publicly endorsed the concept of household voting.
Supporters acknowledge logistical challenges for unmarried women, suggesting a male relative such as a father, brother, or uncle could cast a vote on their behalf. The system offers no provision for same-sex couples, who are effectively excluded from its framework.
An outright repeal of the 19th Amendment is not considered a near-term political possibility, as it would require ratification by three-quarters of US states. However, Pastor Partridge told the Times he anticipates that some politically conservative states may eventually erect new barriers to women's suffrage.
Some practical obstacles could materialise sooner. Proposed legislation like the SAVE America Act, which would require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, could disproportionately affect married women. An estimated 69 million American women do not possess a birth certificate matching their current legal name, typically because they adopted their husband's surname upon marriage.
Research indicates that conservative and Republican-leaning women are statistically more likely to have changed their names after marriage. This means such a law would most heavily burden the very demographic that voted for the politicians advancing it.
