Raw Data: The White House Gender Pay Gap

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Via AEI and the Washington Post, here’s the gender pay gap among White House staffers during the Obama and Trump administrations:

During the Obama years, the average disparity was 13 cents on the dollar. Under Trump, it’s 37 cents. But before you jump to any conclusions, I don’t think this is because Trump believes women should be paid less than men for the same work. He’s not a neanderthal. He just doesn’t like to hire women for senior roles in the first place. What’s wrong with that? There’s nothing nefarious about it, so all you humorless feminists need to back off.

But here’s what I really wonder: what would this number look like if you didn’t include the communications folks? 50 cents? 60 cents? I don’t know the answer to that, but I can say this: if you exclude women whose job is primarily communications, who will shortly be exiled to Singapore, or who are on Melania’s staff, the Trump White House employs a grand total of two (2) women out of 34 in the top two pay grades: Dina Powell and Marcia Kelly. That’s 94 percent men. In its own way, this is actually kind of an impressive accomplishment, what with this being 2017 and all.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend