DOCSLIB.ORG

Legislative Politics in the Solid South

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legislative Politics in the Solid South Legislative Politics in the Solid South The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Olson, Michael. 2020. Legislative Politics in the Solid South. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link https://nrs.harvard.edu/URN-3:HUL.INSTREPOS:37365770 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA ©2020 — Michael Olson All rights reserved. Dissertation Advisor: James M. Snyder, Jr. Michael Olson Legislative Politics in the Solid South Abstract How does the absence of competitive parties aect legislative politics? In this three-paper dissertation, I explore this question in the context of the American Solid South, which persisted from the re-establishment of white Democratic rule following Reconstruction until the Civil Rights Era. Using a variety of original data, particularly on state legislative roll call voting, I explore how one-party government aects legislative behavior and the representation that constituents receive. In the rst paper, I examine how the creation of the Solid South through black disfranchisement aected state legislative roll call voting, demonstrating that formal, in- stitutional black disfranchisement was impactful for legislative representation. This piece lls an important gap in the literature by demonstrating that the rules limiting the franchise in the South shaped the unique political character of the Solid South. In the second paper, I examine whether southern state legislatures exhibited party-like patterns in roll call voting. This allows me to assess whether intra-party factions capably substituted for parties in facilitating issue representation in this one-party, Democrat-dominated political setting. Finally, in the third paper, co-authored with James Snyder, we explore how representation on a particular issue, prohibition, was aected by the Solid South’s lack of party competition. By focusing on this single issue, we are able to develop estimates of voters’ preferences for this important period of American political history. Taken together, these papers rene scholarly understanding of the role of parties in the legislative process and oer new detail and nuance to characterizations of politics in the one-party, Democratic South. iii | Contents Title Page i Copyright ii Abstract iii Table of Contents iv Acknowledgments vi Introduction1 1 “Restoration” and Representation: Legislative Consequences of Black Disfran- chisement in the American South, 1879 – 19164 1.1 Disfranchisement and Legislative Representation................8 1.2 Disfranchisement of African Americans, 1877-1908............... 12 1.3 Roll Call Voting in Southern Legislatures..................... 16 1.4 Empirical Strategy.................................. 26 1.5 Results........................................ 29 1.6 Discussion and Conclusion............................. 38 2 State Legislative Factions and Roll Call Voting in the American Solid South, 1935-1946 41 2.1 The Classication of Southern Factions...................... 46 2.2 Empirical Approach and Data........................... 50 2.3 Measuring Factionalism............................... 53 2.4 Assessing the Electoral Connection........................ 62 2.5 Discussion: Louisiana and South Carolina..................... 69 2.6 Conclusion...................................... 76 3 Dyadic Representation in the American North and South: The Case of Prohi- bition With James M. Snyder, Jr. 79 3.1 Background on Prohibition............................. 84 3.2 Data.......................................... 87 iv 3.3 Empirical Strategy.................................. 95 3.4 Results........................................ 97 3.5 Discussion and Conclusion............................. 105 A Appendix to Paper One 110 A.1 Roll Call Scaling Details............................... 110 A.2 Descriptive Information............................... 122 A.3 Additional Results.................................. 131 A.4 Robustness Checks................................. 142 B Appendix to Paper Two 162 B.1 List of Legislative Sessions............................. 162 B.2 Alternative Numbers of Dimensions and Clusters................ 166 B.3 Alternative Measures of Factionalism....................... 168 B.4 Alternative Measures for Regression Analysis.................. 170 B.5 Louisiana and South Carolina Regressions.................... 174 C Appendix to Paper Three 175 C.1 Descriptive Information............................... 175 C.2 Robustness Checks................................. 188 Bibliography 212 v | Acknowledgments While the popular conception of writing a dissertation characterizes it as solitary under- taking, this dissertation has been anything but. It is not at all an exaggeration to say that without my family, friends, and mentors, this dissertation could not have been completed in its present form. While all remaining faults are my own, so many others have been avoided through others’ contributions. My dissertation committee is comprised of four incredible scholars and people, and it has been my privilege to receive their guidance and instruction throughout my time in graduate school. Jim Snyder, my dissertation chair, has always treated me as a colleague and an equal. Through both his feedback on my solo research and through authoring a paper together, his guidance has dramatically improved my work, and I am proud to call him a colleague and a friend. Ken Shepsle has been a xture of my graduate experience, starting with our weekly meetings in my rst year when he was my assigned faculty mentor. His generosity with his time, both in that rst year and beyond, has been incredibly benecial to my development as a scholar. I have learned so much from him about developing and pursuing interesting research questions. Jon Rogowski has been a constant mentor to me. Not only have I learned an im- mense amount about being a productive researcher from observing and working with him, but the professional and professional-adjacent advice that he has given me—which I solicited far more frequently than was reasonable—has kept me sane during the more turbulent periods of my graduate career. I will be forever thankful for his generosity. Matthew Blackwell, similarly, has always given of himself without complaint. On the numerous occasions in graduate school vi that I found my research outstripping my own statistical abilities, Matt was always able and willing to assist, and it is no exaggeration to say that numerous projects of mine would not have been completed without his help. Together, these four have comprised an outstanding committee, and I am so grateful for their eorts both individual and combined. While I suspect that shared experiences bind all graduate school cohorts together to some extent, I am certain that the group of people I have been surrounded by in graduate school is uniquely kind, supportive, and intelligent. A particular joy has been sharing an oce with some of my best friends in recent years. Shom Mazumder’s passion for research and issues have inuenced my thinking so much. Chris Chaky is an outstanding scholar and teacher, and I have beneted so much from having him in my life. Jaclyn Kaslovsky has been a constant research companion. Partially by dint of studying similar topics, and partially because we complement each others’ strengths as researchers, Jaclyn has immeasurably improved my re- search. Gwen Calaise-Haase has been a wonderful more-recent addition to the oce. Outside of the oce, Jeremy Bowles has been a remarkable friend, and a constant source of advice and goodwill. Andy Stone joined our department in our second year of graduate school, and it is now hard to imagine how much less rich of an experience it would have been without him. Riley Carney routinely and graciously allowed me to interrupt her work so that I could think out loud in her direction. Gabby Malina has been an excellent friend who has oered thought- ful advice and kept me grounded. Amy Lakeman is a wonderful person and scholar who has shaped my own thinking about what research is and can be. Shiro Kuriwaki is incredibly giv- ing of his time and is so incredibly talented. So many others have been good friends and have oered thoughtful feedback, some of whom I am sure I am forgetting: Jake Brown, Max Go- plerud, Chris Havasy, Hanno Hilbig, Daniel Moskowitz, Connor Phillips, Albert Rivero, Tyler Simko, and Michael Zoorob. I have been so fortunate to benet from the collaboration and friendship of so many in the Harvard Government Department. I had the privilege to present portions of this dissertation in a number of venues. At Har- vard, the American Politics Research Workshop, Political Economy Workshop, and the annual vii graduate student poster session provided excellent forums for sharing this work and receiving feedback, and I am grateful to the organizers, faculty advisers, and all who attended and oered thoughts. Outside of Harvard, the annual meetings of the Midwest, Southern, and American Political Science Associations, the annual conference at Yale University’s Center for the Study of American Politics, the University of Virginia Religious Studies Department Graduate Con- ference on “An Age of Extremism,” the Congress and History Conference,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Brute Caricature
    The Brute Caricature MORE PICTURES The brute caricature portrays black men as innately savage, animalistic, destructive, and criminal -- deserving punishment, maybe death. This brute is a fiend, a sociopath, an anti-social menace. Black brutes are depicted as hideous, terrifying predators who target helpless victims, especially white women. Charles H. Smith (1893), writing in the 1890s, claimed, "A bad negro is the most horrible creature upon the earth, the most brutal and merciless"(p. 181). Clifton R. Breckinridge (1900), a contemporary of Smith's, said of the black race, "when it produces a brute, he is the worst and most insatiate brute that exists in human form" (p. 174). George T. Winston (1901), another "Negrophobic" writer, claimed: When a knock is heard at the door [a White woman] shudders with nameless horror. The black brute is lurking in the dark, a monstrous beast, crazed with lust. His ferocity is almost demoniacal. A mad bull or tiger could scarcely be more brutal. A whole community is frenzied with horror, with the blind and furious rage for vengeance.(pp. 108-109) During slavery the dominant caricatures of blacks -- Mammy, Coon, Tom, and picaninny -- portrayed them as childlike, ignorant, docile, groveling, and generally harmless. These portrayals were pragmatic and instrumental. Proponents of slavery created and promoted images of blacks that justified slavery and soothed white consciences. If slaves were childlike, for example, then a paternalistic institution where masters acted as quasi-parents to their slaves was humane, even morally right. More importantly, slaves were rarely depicted as brutes because that portrayal might have become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
    [Show full text]
  • From James A
    Revision, Fall 2004 (20 November 2004) Prepared for James A. Thurber, ed. Rivals for Power, 3rd ed., (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005). Partisan Polarization, Politics, and the Presidency: Structural Sources of Conflict James P. Pfiffner George Mason University In his campaign for the presidency in the 2000 election, George W. Bush promised that he would work closely with Congress and the Democrats and tone down the corrosive partisan rhetoric that had come to characterize Washington in the last years of the 20th century. After a very close election in which Bush narrowly won the presidency while trailing the Democratic candidate by half a million votes, many expected him to take a conciliatory approach to Democrats in Congress and seek out moderates of both parties to forge an agenda in the middle of the political spectrum. But that is not what happened. Arguing that political capital had to be spent rather than conserved, Bush put forward a conservative policy agenda and won some impressive victories.i Just when his momentum began to lag in late summer of 2001, terrorists struck New York and Washington. The atrocities of 9-11 transformed the political landscape and presented Bush with a country unified under his leadership and broad international support for the United States. Yet three years later as he ran for reelection, the nation was deeply divided over his presidency and the war in Iraq. Although much of the political division between the parties in Congress and among partisans in the electorate could be attributed to disagreement over President Bush’s policies, the roots of the divisive partisan politics of the Bush Presidency lay in political developments in the preceding four decades.
    [Show full text]
  • December 8, 2016 President Daniel F. Mahony Winthrop University
    December 8, 2016 President Daniel F. Mahony Winthrop University Office of the President 114 Tillman Hall Rock Hill, South Carolina 29733 URGENT Sent via U.S. Mail and Electronic Mail ([email protected]) Dear President Mahony: The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending liberty, freedom of speech, due process, academic freedom, legal equality, and freedom of conscience on America’s college campuses. The National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), founded in 1974, is an alliance of over 50 national nonprofit organizations, including literary, artistic, religious, educational, professional, labor, and civil liberties groups dedicated to promoting the right to free speech. FIRE and NCAC are concerned for the state of freedom of expression at Winthrop University due to the spurious charges and threats of expulsion or suspension levied against student Samantha Valdez over her alleged involvement in an art installation criticizing Winthrop’s naming of Tillman Hall. The following is our understanding of the facts; please inform us if you believe we are in error. On the night of November 12 or the morning of November 13, 2016, figures—made of nylon stockings stuffed with dirt, spray-painted black, and shaped like bodies—were placed in the trees outside Winthrop’s Tillman Hall, and a piece of paper that said “Tillman’s Legacy” was taped over the sign outside the hall.1 Tillman Hall has, for months, been at the center of 1 For a photograph of the installation, see Caroline Fountain (@FountainFox46) TWITTER (Nov. 14, 2016 1:23 PM), https://twitter.com/FountainFox46/status/798229762246406144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Rise and Fall of the Farmer in the Gilded Age
    AP U.S. History: Unit 6.4 Teacher’s Edition The Political Rise and Fall of the Farmer in the Gilded Age Themes of the Gilded Age: Industrialism: U.S. became the world’s most powerful economy by 1890s (exceeding combined output of Britain and Germany; railroads, steel, oil, electricity, banking Unions and reform movements sought to curb the injustices of industrialism. Urbanization: America was transformed from an agrarian nation to an urban nation between 1865 (where 50% of Americans were farmers) and 1920 (where only 25% were farmers). (2% today) Millions of "New Immigrants" came from Southern and Eastern Europe, mostly to cities to work in factories. By 1900 society had become more stratified into classes than any time before or since. The “Great West": farming, mining, & cattle frontiers Farmers increasingly lost ground in the new industrial economy and eventually organized (Populism). In 1880, 25% of those who farmed did not own their land. 90% of African Americans lived in the South; 75% were tenant farmers or sharecroppers. Politics: hard vs. soft money ('70s & '90s); tariff ('80s); corruption due to political machines, patronage & trusts (throughout late 19th c.); election of 1896 ©2014 HistorySage.com All Rights Reserved This material may not be posted on any website other than HistorySage.com HistorySage.com APUSH Lecture Notes Page 2 Unit 6.4: Political Rise and Fall of the Farmer I. The Money Issue and Tariffs A. The Panic of 1873 and subsequent depression resulted in deflation during the presidency of Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877). 1. Western mining states and farmers sought the introduction of silver to the nation’s monetary standard in order to create inflation.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAIRMEN of SENATE STANDING COMMITTEES [Table 5-3] 1789–Present
    CHAIRMEN OF SENATE STANDING COMMITTEES [Table 5-3] 1789–present INTRODUCTION The following is a list of chairmen of all standing Senate committees, as well as the chairmen of select and joint committees that were precursors to Senate committees. (Other special and select committees of the twentieth century appear in Table 5-4.) Current standing committees are highlighted in yellow. The names of chairmen were taken from the Congressional Directory from 1816–1991. Four standing committees were founded before 1816. They were the Joint Committee on ENROLLED BILLS (established 1789), the joint Committee on the LIBRARY (established 1806), the Committee to AUDIT AND CONTROL THE CONTINGENT EXPENSES OF THE SENATE (established 1807), and the Committee on ENGROSSED BILLS (established 1810). The names of the chairmen of these committees for the years before 1816 were taken from the Annals of Congress. This list also enumerates the dates of establishment and termination of each committee. These dates were taken from Walter Stubbs, Congressional Committees, 1789–1982: A Checklist (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985). There were eleven committees for which the dates of existence listed in Congressional Committees, 1789–1982 did not match the dates the committees were listed in the Congressional Directory. The committees are: ENGROSSED BILLS, ENROLLED BILLS, EXAMINE THE SEVERAL BRANCHES OF THE CIVIL SERVICE, Joint Committee on the LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, LIBRARY, PENSIONS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS, RETRENCHMENT, REVOLUTIONARY CLAIMS, ROADS AND CANALS, and the Select Committee to Revise the RULES of the Senate. For these committees, the dates are listed according to Congressional Committees, 1789– 1982, with a note next to the dates detailing the discrepancy.
    [Show full text]
  • Totalitarian Dynamics, Colonial History, and Modernity: the US South After the Civil War
    ADVERTIMENT. Lʼaccés als continguts dʼaquesta tesi doctoral i la seva utilització ha de respectar els drets de la persona autora. Pot ser utilitzada per a consulta o estudi personal, així com en activitats o materials dʼinvestigació i docència en els termes establerts a lʼart. 32 del Text Refós de la Llei de Propietat Intel·lectual (RDL 1/1996). Per altres utilitzacions es requereix lʼautorització prèvia i expressa de la persona autora. En qualsevol cas, en la utilització dels seus continguts caldrà indicar de forma clara el nom i cognoms de la persona autora i el títol de la tesi doctoral. No sʼautoritza la seva reproducció o altres formes dʼexplotació efectuades amb finalitats de lucre ni la seva comunicació pública des dʼun lloc aliè al servei TDX. Tampoc sʼautoritza la presentació del seu contingut en una finestra o marc aliè a TDX (framing). Aquesta reserva de drets afecta tant als continguts de la tesi com als seus resums i índexs. ADVERTENCIA. El acceso a los contenidos de esta tesis doctoral y su utilización debe respetar los derechos de la persona autora. Puede ser utilizada para consulta o estudio personal, así como en actividades o materiales de investigación y docencia en los términos establecidos en el art. 32 del Texto Refundido de la Ley de Propiedad Intelectual (RDL 1/1996). Para otros usos se requiere la autorización previa y expresa de la persona autora. En cualquier caso, en la utilización de sus contenidos se deberá indicar de forma clara el nombre y apellidos de la persona autora y el título de la tesis doctoral.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee, the Solid South, and the 1952 Presidential Election
    University of Mississippi eGrove Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors Theses Honors College) Spring 5-9-2020 Y'all Like Ike: Tennessee, the Solid South, and the 1952 Presidential Election Cameron N. Regnery University of Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis Part of the American Politics Commons, Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Regnery, Cameron N., "Y'all Like Ike: Tennessee, the Solid South, and the 1952 Presidential Election" (2020). Honors Theses. 1338. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/1338 This Undergraduate Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College) at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Y’ALL LIKE IKE: TENNESSEE, THE SOLID SOUTH, AND THE 1952 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION by Cameron N. Regnery A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Mississippi in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College. Oxford April 2020 Approved by: __________________________________ Advisor: Dr. Darren Grem __________________________________ Reader: Dr. Rebecca Marchiel __________________________________ Reader: Dr. Conor Dowling © 2020 Cameron N. Regnery ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my parents for supporting me both in writing this thesis and throughout my time at Ole Miss. I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Darren Grem, for helping me with both the research and writing of this thesis. It would certainly not have been possible without him.
    [Show full text]
  • The Civil Rights Realignment: How Race Dominates Presidential Elections
    Political Analysis Volume 17 Volume XVII (2015) Article 1 2015 The iC vil Rights Realignment: How Race Dominates Presidential Elections ` Timothy J. Hoffman Seton Hall University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/pa Part of the American Politics Commons, and the Political Theory Commons Recommended Citation Hoffman, Timothy J. (2015) "The ivC il Rights Realignment: How Race Dominates Presidential Elections `," Political Analysis: Vol. 17 , Article 1. Available at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/pa/vol17/iss1/1 The Civil Rights Realignment: How Race Dominates Presidential Elections Timothy J. Hoffman The evolution of the black vote in presidential elections is one of the most significant changes to the American electorate over the last century. During this period, the black vote shifted to become one of the most solid pillars of the Democratic coalition, culminating with the historic election of Barack Obama as the first African American president in 2008. The race gap is arguably the most influential gap in explaining the political behavior of Americans and affects other behavioral gaps in American politics. This paper will take an historical perspective of presidential elections and political party dynamics since the Civil War and investigate how black voters defected from the Republican Party due to the actions of Democratic presidents who sought to enfranchise African Americans to build a stronger electoral coalition. We will analyze how the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932 began the evolution of the black vote, as the New Deal promised new opportunities for minorities and signaled a shift towards a more involved government that served the needs of the people.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vulcan Historical Review Daniel Fowler, William Watt, Deborah Hayes, Rebecca Dobrinski, Kaye Cochran Nail, John Wiley, George O
    Donna L. Cox, Colin J. Davis, David M. Brewer, Robert Maddox, Sameera Hasan, Jerry Snead, Stacy S. Simon, Eric Knudsen, Patricia A. Donna L. Cox, Colin J. Davis, David M. Brewer, Robert Maddox, Sameera Hasan, Jerry Snead, Stacy S. Simon, Eric Knudsen, Patricia A. Matthews, Scott M. Speagle, Will C. Holmes, J. D. Jackson, Aimee Armstrong Belden, Carol Balmer, Alan Dismukes, Jack E. Davis, Kenneth Matthews, Scott M. Speagle, Will C. Holmes, J. D. Jackson, Aimee Armstrong Belden, Carol Balmer, Alan Dismukes, Jack E. Davis, Ken- Homsley, Kurt E. Kinbacher, Jonathan L. Foster, Howard J. Fox III, Jeremy P. Soileau, Catherine L. Druhan, Andrew T. Baird, Averil Charles neth Homsley, Kurt E. Kinbacher, Jonathanth L. Foster, Howard J. Fox III, Jeremy P. Soileau, Catherine L. Druhan, Andrew T. Baird, Averil Ramsey, Mary B. Ashley, J. Kyle Irvin, Ellen M. Griffin, Tiffany Bence, Michelle L. Devins, Kelly Hamilton, Rhonda K. Mitchell, Roger K. Charles Ramsey, Mary B. Ashley,20 J. Kyle Irvin,ANNIVERSARY Ellen M. Griffin, Tiffany Bence, Michelle L.ISSUE Devins, Kelly Hamilton, Rhonda K. Mitchell, Steele, Lindsay Stainton-James, Sanford E. Jeames, Timothy L. Pennycuff, Donnelly F. Lancaster, Melinda Holm, Ron Bates, Jessica Lacher Roger K. Steele, Lindsay Stainton-James, Sanford E. Jeames, Timothy L. Pennycuff, Donnelly F. Lancaster, Melinda Holm, Ron Bates, Jes- Feldman, Horace Huntley, Cynthia A. Luckie, Elizabeth Wells, Becky Strickland, Wayne Coleman, Ashley C. Grantham, Allie A. Hanna, sica Lacher Feldman, Horace Huntley, Cynthia A. Luckie, Elizabeth Wells, Becky Strickland, Wayne Coleman, Ashley C. Grantham, Allie Robert W. Heinrich, Christopher M. Long, Jerry Tiarsmith, Jennifer Marie Wilson, Pamela E.
    [Show full text]
  • CARTER HAS SOLID LEAD OVER FORD, REAGAN for Release: June 24, 1976 by Louis Harris B with His First Ballot Nomination Now Virtually Assured, Former Georgia Gov
    The Harris Survey CARTER HAS SOLID LEAD OVER FORD, REAGAN For Release: June 24, 1976 By Louis Harris b With his first ballot nomination now virtually assured, former Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter has aoved out to a sweeping 53-40% lead over President Ford and a much wider 58-352 margin over former Calif. Gov. Ronald Re.~;;cn, according to the latest Harris Survey, held in mid-June. The base of Carter's strength is his apparent ability to carry his hone area of the South. He leads Gerald Ford in the border states by 68-29% and in the deep South by 57-38%. He is ahead of Ronnld Reagan in tkc region by almost the same margin: 68-28% in the border states and 55-372 in the deep South. He is the first Democrat in 12 years to demonstrate a capacity to win a solid South. The reason for Carter's current wide lead in this latest poll of 1,480 registered and likely voters is that traditional Democratic groups have rallied behind his candidacy now that the primary season is over. --Among labor union members, Carter leads the President by 61-33% and Reagan by 64-30%. --Among blacks, he holds a 71-17% edge over Mr. Ford and a 75-119: spread over the former California governor. --Among people who view themselves as liberals, Carter is ahead against President Ford by 67-27% and against Ronald Reagan by 76-182. -Among Catholics, he runs well ahead of the President by 53-409: and he beats Reagan by a more sizable 58-36%.
    [Show full text]
  • 8Th Grade Social Studies Assignments April 2 - 30
    8th Grade Social Studies Assignments April 2 - 30 APRIL 1-10 Pacing Guide (8-5.4, 8-5.5, 8-5.6) R e a d i n g & Q ’ s April 2 Complete 8-5.4 Questions 1 - 15 (15 Q's) April 3-4 Complete 8-5.4 Questions 16 - 30 (15 Q's) April 5-6 Complete 8-5.5 Questions 1 - 19 (19 Q's) April 7-8 Complete 8-5.6 Questions 1 - 13 (13 Q's) April 9-10 Complete 8-5.6 Questions 14 - 25 (12 Q's) APRIL 20-30 Pacing Guide (Choose 3 Tasks) April 20-23 Complete One (Journal It, Timeline, ABC Book, Civil War VIPs, Civil War Women in Action) April 24-27 Complete a Different Task (Journal It, Timeline, ABC Book, Civil War VIPs, Civil War Women in Action) April 28-30 Complete a Different Task (Journal It, Timeline, ABC Book, Civil War VIPs, Civil War Women in Action) • When you are finished with 1 or all of your assignments, take a clear picture and email them to your SS teacher. Make sure they are labeled with assignment name and your name. • Remember, you do not need to print out the assignments; you can place all answers on your own piece of notebook paper labeled with the assignment name and your name. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] April 2-10 Reading & Q’s Assignments 8th Grade SS State Standards Focus: 8-5.4; 8-5.5; 8-5.6 Packet Contents: - 8-5.4 Support Document: “Systems - Policies - Actions” - 8-5.4 Review Questions - 8-5.5 Support Document: “Industrialization” - 8-5.5 Review Questions - 8-5.6 Support Document: “Plight of Farmers” - 8-5.6 Review Questions Directions: For each Curriculum Standard Read Article and Complete the corresponding Review Questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Day 2 – Virginia Political History
    9/28/2017 Day 2 – Virginia Political History 1 9/28/2017 2 9/28/2017 The “Solid South” (Presidential Elections) Virginia voted for Republican Candidate in 1872, 1928, 1952, and 1956 3 9/28/2017 Partisan Breakdown in Virginia – Presidential Elections (1960-2016) 1960-1968 1972 1976 1980-2004 2008-2016 Current Virginia At the beginning of 2017, Virginia was one of 19 states under divided government Statewide offices (Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, United States Senators) controlled by Democrats. House of Delegates and State Senate Controlled by Republicans (House 66-34, Senate 21-19) House of Representatives – 7 Republicans, 4 Democrats 4 9/28/2017 Recent Virginia Election History Presidential elections 1992-2016, Republican candidates won four times, Democratic candidates won three times. In 2016, Virginia was a closely watched battleground state Democrat Hillary Clinton defeated Republican Donald Trump 49.7% to 44.0% 2016 Presidential Election Clinton defeated Trump in 51 out of 100 House of Delegates districts Trump defeated Clinton in six of 11 Congressional districts Five counties in Virginia—Buckingham, Caroline, Essex, Nelson, and Westmoreland—voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 but voted for Trump in 2016. 5 9/28/2017 Virginian Election History From 1977 through 2009, the Virginia Gubernatorial Election went against the Presidential Election from the previous year: 1977 – Republican wins after Carter (D) wins in 1976 1981 – Democrat wins after Reagan (R) wins in 1980 1985 – Democrat wins after Reagan (R) wins
    [Show full text]