What if we split the state in half, roughly along the Fall Line?

I wonder what the impact would be on our politics and demographics. 60+ northern counties becoming their own state, 90+ southern counties becoming their own. 

What would the capital of South Georgia be? Savannah? Tifton? Would it be even more agriculturally-dependent than Georgia is right now? 

And what would the impact on Georgia Democrats be when they are split between these two states? Most of the Democratic base is concentrated in Metro Atlanta, but African-American voters who straddle both sides or live even further south of the Fall Line give more geographic breadth to the Democrats outside of the most urbanized areas. So many of these rural Democratic counties in “South Georgia”, especially in Southwest Georgia and the Savannah area, are Black Belt counties where the ancestors of their current African-American residents once toiled the soil as slaves and sharecroppers. “North Georgia”, by comparison, didn’t have as much rich soil to attract plantation owners to such an extent, especially not in Appalachian 

But at the same time, perhaps it would wean the DPG further away from its historic legacy as a party dependent on the agricultural sector for votes, and center the party as a pro-industry, pro-economic diversification party.

The Hill: The political pendulum is swinging back from conservative control in so many ways

Last time Nancy Pelosi took office as Speaker of the House in 2007, it was in the last Congress of George W. Bush’s Republican presidency. She came in on a wave election, gaining the Senate and the House after a long exile of Democrats from the Speaker’s seat dating back from 1994. She would hold the seat for a short four years, losing it in 2010 during Barack Obama’s first midterm. 

This time, Nancy Pelosi has done something that Democrats haven’t done since 1930: flip the House and take the Speakership in an opposing President’s first midterm. Within the same period, Republicans have done this 3 times: 1946, 1994 and 2010. The latter two happened during the post-Civil Rights era described in this article. 

Because this is such a rare event, Pelosi is now garnering comparisons to other Speakers of the House who used their bully pulpit to rhetorically oppose the White House within the last century: Democrats like Tip O’Neill, Republicans like Newt Gingrich and John Boehner. But Pelosi will take office in an era closer to the hyper-partisanship of the latter two GOP speakers, and will have the chance to hew herself closer to or distinguish herself from O’Neill, who managed to find ways to work with Reagan and his Republican Senate. By comparison, Gingrich and Boehner fought desperate knife-fights with their Democratic presidents to make them one-term presidents. 

She may have to find a way to use all of those three examples, but her prior experience in the Speakership – with a weakened President on his way out as well as a Senate in her party’s grasp – will be less useful. She has a creepy President who values loyalty, uses his opponents to shield himself from scrutiny, and abuses his authority flagrantly. Can she milk this President, or will she have to get into a knife fight for the next two or more years?

That may be a good measure of how intense the swing away from this party era’s conservatism may be.

Taiwan News: Live-stream debate on marriage equality referendum commenced Nov. 4

If you’re interested in ballot initiatives and their impact on civil rights, there is another referendum on the ballot in Taiwan on November 24. There will be at least 4-5 competing questions regarding LGBT rights, 3 of which will deal with whether or not to legalize same-sex marriage or partnerships, and 2 on whether or not to legalize LGBT-inclusive education in Taiwanese schools. 

This could be as big as #Prop8 in 2008, as one-on-one debates on same-sex marriage have been live-streamed to Taiwanese audiences. One in particular, a debate on Nov. 4 on #Question14 involving a pro-equality member of the Taiwanese Parliament (or “Legislative Yuan”) vs. an anti-marriage equality professor, drew praise from online commenters to the MP for his use of evidence and charts to prove that same-sex marriage does not correlate to declining birthrates. 

All of this only became necessary because the DPP government of Tsai Ing-Wen dragged their feet after Taiwan’s High Court ruled in 2017 that same-sex marriage should be legalized by parliament or automatically within the next two years (despite the DPP campaigning on a platform to legalize marriage equality), and the religious right took advantage of a new referendum law to put anti-LGBT questions on the national ballot during Taiwan’s midterms. LGBT activists put their own competing questions on the ballot before the deadline. 

This is a novel and grandiose idea, but it comes from the same “Pelosi is old and unpopular so chuck her out” narrative that ignores what just happened on Tuesday and that no one is currently challenging Pelosi for the speakership, or Hoyer for Majority Leader, or Clyburn for Majority Whip. In spite of the “move fast and break things” ideology of the White House, seniority and experience still matter in Congress, and the younger, more hardcore or more ambitious Dems are jockeying for Caucus Chair and Assistant Leader. 

Also, it ignores the fact that governorships and control of power in the states is and has long been just as important as what happens at the federal level. The governors hold a crucial bit of power over redistricting of Congress. Don’t dole out the consolation prize while the counting is still going on in Georgia and several other states. 

But I’m really surprised that this article mentions nothing of Stacey Abrams‘ big role as House Minority Leader in the General Assembly. Nowhere in this article! If you’re going to talk about why Stacey should be the next speaker of the U.S. House, how are you not going to mention her own state-level experience equivalent to Nancy Pelosi’s experience???