For example, in the past, women candidates faced discrimination by party elites. They had little motivation to recruit women to run for office, and those who did want to run were encouraged to run for unimportant positions. Their candidacies were not well supported or well funded. As a result, women had difficulty in fund-raising and in establishing credibility in the eyes of the media and the voters (Gertzog, 1995). Another barrier that used to exist was the attitude of voters toward women in general. In the past, substantial percentages of citizens felt that the women"s place was in the home, not in elective positions. A third barrier that used to exist has been termed the "social eligibility pool concerns" of the citizens. Many voters have certain expectations about the backgrounds of quality candidates. This could include military service, educational accomplishments, and previous elected experiences. While men usually entered politics through legal or other professional careers, women usually entered politics through community volunteerism or women"s groups (Darcy, Welch, and Clark, 1994).

             Today, the three barriers mentioned above have shrunk considerably. Regarding campaign finance, women have almost achieved equality with men in the amount of money raised and spent. In 1988, for the first time ever, female nominees in the US House of Representatives races raised and spent more money on average than male nominees. The years since then have shown women still raising and spending almost or equal the amount of men (Burrell, 1994). The attitudes of the population have also changed considerably through the years. More and more women have been leaving the home to enter the work force. Whether one views this as good or bad, it cannot be denied that this trend is contributing to a more accepting view of women in the work force, in general. The third barrier, the backgrounds of women, is also being overcome.