Which statements about how Federalists and Anti-Federalists felt about the Constitution are true?
Choose all answers that are correct.
A.The Anti-Federalists demanded that the Constitution include a bill of rights to guarantee personal freedoms.
B.The Federalists at first argued that a bill of rights was not needed in the Constitution.
C.The Anti-Federalists created a second draft of the Constitution, this time adding a bill of rights, and ratified their version.
D.The Federalists finally relented and promised to add a bill of rights to the Constitution, which cleared the way for its ratification.
Answer:
The Federalists finally relented and promised to add a bill of rights to the Constitution, which cleared the way for its ratification.
The Anti-Federalists demanded that the Constitution include a bill of rights to guarantee personal freedoms.
Native Americans in the Pampas and the
Andes grew all types of food in their early
history.
True
False
What are 2 similarities between Hispanic culture and American culture ?
Explanation:
Both countries believe in the value of education, both teach the same subjects, many of the clothes we wear are the same as well as similar food and a value of religion plus much of American and Mexican culture blend together in certain places in the US which also makes the transition to American culture easier.Answer:
the two countries believe in the value of education
and teach the same subjects in school and college
and the clothes fashion are kinda same
and food is similler .
1. Explain why the North was in a better position to feed their troops even though
the South's major industry was agriculture.
Drag and drop the tiles to match the topics to the Supreme Court cases.
limits freedom
of speechsupports antitrust
regulationprotects workers
rights
Answer:
In Lochner v. New York (1905) = protecting workers rights
In Schenck v. United States (1919) =limits freedom of speech
In Northern = supports antitrust
Explanation:
it was right
The US government encourage American industry in the late
nineteenth century by creating protective tariffs."
True or false
Answer:
True
Explanation:
What is a personal staff member with office management duties
Answer:
administrative assistant.
Explanation:
Office Manager Job Description: Top Duties and Qualifications
An Office Manager,or Business Manager,is responsible for overseeing the daily operations of an office and its various departments. Their duties include communicating with department heads, relaying important information or policy changes from upper management and implementing incentives to enhance employee productivity.
Office Manager duties and responsibilities
Office Managers may be the first point of contact for internal and external parties for your office, which may impact some customer service and communication elements of their job duties. Duties and responsibilities will vary depending on an organization’s size, but might include:
Overseeing the work of all office employees to ensure they work productively and meet deadlines and company standards Counseling any employees struggling in their roles Answering telephone calls and emails from customers and clients and directing them to relevant staff Creating an office budget and ensuring all employees follow it Monitoring office supplies and ordering new stationery, furniture, appliances and electronics as required Interviewing and training new office employees and organizing their employment paperwork Organizing maintenance companies to keep the office clean and safe and ensure its appliances are in good working order Reporting office progress to senior management and working with them to improve office operations and proceduresOPEN ENDED QUESTION
Do you think the French Revolution was successful? Why or why not?
Rewatch
Submit
Answer:
After the bloodshed, civil rights, and laws the anarchy did not represent the values that the citizens had fought for. So, the French Revolution was a major failure and a minor success.
What does it mean for something to be ironic
Answer: when what actually happens turns out to be completely different from what would be expected
Explanation:
What do you know already about the United States Constitution?
Answer:
The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America. This founding document, originally comprising seven articles, delineates the national frame of government.Explanation:
15 PTS How did the United States entry into World War I change the culture and international political policies of the country?
Answer:
World War I was the "war to end all wars." It had major consequences on Americans both at home and abroad.
Explanation:
How did nationalism lead to the breaking of these empires?
Austro-Hungarian
Russian
Ottoman
Answer:
Explanation:
Nationalist disputes led to the
division of the empire into two
states, Austria and Hungary.
After World War I, the empire
divided into separate nation-states
Nationalist feeling of non-Russian peoples, fueled by the
policy of Russification, weakened
the empire, which fell as a
result of war and revolution.
Conservative Turks, angered by
the Ottoman policy of granting
equal citizenship to nationalist
groups, caused tensions that
weakened and eventually broke
up the empire.
14. The one of the most prosperous province in India.
1)Satara
2)Pune
3)Bengal
4)Chennai
Answer:
satara
Explanation:
branless me please if i am wrong
HELP ME OUT PLEASE!!
Why did the framers feel it was necessary at times to amend the Constitution?
A) amending the Constitution can reflect changing times, beliefs, and social conditions.
B) amending the Constitution would allow for tyranny.
C) amending the Constitution shows other countries how strong the U.S. government is.
D) amending the Constitution allows for a smooth transition of power between political parties.
Answer:
C would be your answer
Explanation:
the men who wrote the Constitution, wanted the amendment process to be difficult. They believed that a long and complicated amendment process would help create stability in the United States. Because it is so difficult to amend the Constitution, amendments are usually permanent.
what is the nationalism
Which statement about the Amazon rain forest is false?
0 It is considerably smaller today than it was a century ago because of cutting and burning.
O It is considerably larger today than it was a century ago because of self-reseeding.
O More that 500 species of trees grow in a single two-and-a-half-acre plot.
O Scientists believe species there could hold the key to medical breakthroughs.
Answer: It is considerably larger today than it was a century ago because of self-reseeding.
Explanation: I hope this helps :) You've got this!
Answer:
O It is considerably larger today than it was a century ago because of self-reseeding.
Explanation:
this is correct
how dose stocks help sauce in flavor
Answer: they form the base for many soups and sauces. This extracts the flavor, aroma, color, body, and nutrients of the ingredients. stock is made from simmering bones with vegetables, minimally adding herbs & salt to let the true flavor of the simmering, also stock can also be boiled to eliminate some of the liquid, which thickens the stock and intensifies the flavor.
2
Which permanent changes to the federal government resulted from the New Deal?
OA. It expanded the role of governmental actions in American life and business.
OB.
It created policies that transferred some of the authority to the states.
O c.
It created policies that established work programs that continue today.
OD. It expanded the power of the federal reserve to fundamentally reform banks.
Reset
Next
A) it expanded the role of governmental action in American life and business.
Explanation:
right on plato
see attachment
Correct option is A.
The permanent changes to the federal government resulted resulted from the New Deal is to "expanded the role of governmental actions in American life and business."
By granting the government the authority to control previously unregulated areas of business, the New Deal extended the Government's role in our economy. Banking, agriculture, and housing are the most common example. It was accompanied by the establishment of new programs such as social security.
To know more about federal government, refer to the link:
https://brainly.com/question/5394575
What anti-federalist argument does madison counter in this essay?
Answer: " that of the expanse of the United States being too big for Republican Government to work"
hope that helps
Why might so many Kalingans have died of hunger and disease?
They didn't have enough food and there was alot of sick people who may of had a disease , maybe other people caught on to that dieseae.
who is asteria and what does it mean
give info about that
help asap
Answer:
Asteria earned a $27,000 salary as an employee in 2020. How much should her employer have withheld from her paycheck for FICA taxes
Based on this map, why were Spain and Portugal initially more successful at Atlantic exploration than many other European states?
1. They dominated Mediterranean trade routes and wanted to extend this power into the Atlantic.
2.They were two of the westernmost European states, both located very close to Africa.
3.They were both Catholic kingdoms funded by the pope.
Answer:
I think 1
Explanation:
Im not 100% sure thought
To what extent did the American soldiers receive the clothing that they were promised
Explanation:
composition of population means the distribution of the number of the population according to characteristics such as age,sex,marital status,socio-economic status. ... It helps to find out the structure of population. It helps to study on various demographic indicators
Explain the benefits and costs of a free trade agreement
Answer:
Benefits:
- Increases access to higher-quality and lower priced goods
- Higher growth rate
- Improves efficiency and innovation
- Drives competitiveness
- Promotes fairness
Cons:
- increasing job outsourcing
- poor working conditions
- degradation of natural resources
Explanation:
Helpppppp !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Answer: To stop Senate corruption, progressives wanted the direct election of senators by all state voters. In 1912 Congress passed the direct-election amendment. In 1913 it was ratified, becoming the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution.
Explanation:
Limiting expression of personal opinions or beliefs is a proper function on government
True False ?
Answer:
So, no, the government can't limit it. False, I think? (I am kinda confused on your question, so, I gave the best answer I could)
Explanation:
The First Amendment guarantees our right to free expression and free association, which means that the government does not have the right to forbid us from saying what we like and writing what we like; we can form clubs and organizations, and take part in demonstrations and rallies.
How was Mexico's struggle for independence similar to and different from the founding of the United States?
Answer:
Mexico was first populated more than 13000 years ago before the Spanish conquered and colonized the country in the 16th century.
Which Renaissance artist created a bronze statue of David?
Please help!!
Your answer is → sculptor Donatello
Answer: sculptor Donatello
Explanation:
David is the title of two statues of the biblical hero David by the Italian early Renaissance sculptor Donatello. They consist of an early work in marble of a clothed figure (1408–09), and a far more famous bronze figure
What are the challenges we face today to uphold the rule of law? What about in the future?
Answer:
Anyone who holds that what matters most in politics is having the right people in power and not how power should be constrained will be unconvinced of the value of the rule of law. Neither will anyone who believes that institutions of public power are merely instruments of the ruling class that need to be dismantled rather than merely constrained. For the majority of modern democratic societies, however, the rule of law’s requirement that both rulers and the ruled be accountable to the law is of unquestionable value. To be sure, in the modern world, it is the liberal tradition that values the rule of law most highly. Liberals who are concerned with ways of protecting (and realizing) liberty in some form and averting threats to it view the rule of law as an overarching source of security. Nonetheless, there is substantial disagreement even among liberals over what exactly counts as a faithful application of the term and, even when that is pinned down, how it is to be accomplished.
In itself, the notion of the rule of law is not a faithful description of any state of affairs but a complex ideal that is even more complex to realize. Thus, there is reason to be skeptical about whether societies necessarily benefit from all that might be invoked under the term. The independence of the judiciary, for instance, is clearly a problem if the independence is misused to foster the sectoral privileges of judicial personnel or to allow unchallenged interpretations of the law. Heavy emphasis on the formal aspects of the rule of law—for example, on procedural justice—may distract from the content and consequences of those laws. Critics of a strictly formal conception of the rule of law argue that too much attention to legal process generates significant vices of its own in the form of exaggerated legalism and neglect of the political or real-world dimensions of legal conflicts. Excessive veneration of the law and legal procedures may be too costly if it inhibits independent social assessments of the merits of a given policy proposal or if the official mandate of “blindness” gives legitimacy to actions performed “according to the law” even when most people would oppose such acts. Some writers have charged, moreover, that the increasing domain of judges and lawyers—indeed, their encroachment into areas previously left to politicians and the electorate—entails the loss of much that is politically and democratically valuable.
In short, too much emphasis on procedures for preventing arbitrariness can lead to subverting the doing of justice according to what might otherwise find support in the rule of law, and the legal strictures then become themselves a form of arbitrariness that is no more legitimate. On the other hand, those who defend the negative value of the rule of law object to more substantive understandings of the ideal on the grounds that morally ambitious aspirations about the rule of law threaten to purge the concept of its specificity and usefulness. They argue that to open the concept to a whole host of extralegal considerations about substantive justice and wider societal goals is to conflate ideas about “the rule of law” with notions about “the rule of good law,” such that any distinction between the two is reduced to nothing. As a consequence, no discussion of the rule of law can be complete without some philosophical reflection on law, including on its purpose and meaning.
1) What was the Yazoo Land Act?
2) Why did the Act become a Scandal?
3) Why were the legislators in the picture burning the law after it had already been repealed?
4) What did that message send to the public?
Answer:
You know sometimes reading the lesson really helps you progress in school and makes it alot easier on you so you dont have to be here
Explanation: