Hamilton believed that the federal government had powers to do whatever was "necessary and proper" in exercising leadership beyond its specifically enumerated powers.
A key example was Hamilton's argument for the creation of a national bank, which was not specifically stipulated by the Constitution. Hamilton's argument was based on the "necessary and proper" clause of Article I, Section 8, of the United States Constitution. After enumerating a number of the powers of Congress, including borrowing money, coining money, regulating commerce, etc, Section 8 of Article I closes with by saying Congress shall have power "to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Hamilton favored a loose interpretation of the Constitution -- in other words, that the Constitution allows for anything that is not strictly forbidden in what it has expressly stated. A national bank was not strictly listed as something Congress could establish, but there was nothing in the Constitution to prohibit it. And the "necessary and proper" clause gave leeway to create it.
Overall, Hamilton favored a stronger federal government than did some of his peers among the founding fathers.
Answer:
The gravity force and normal force
Answer:
It wasn't until 1874, when Illinois farmer Joseph Glidden emerged victorious from patent battle over a mechanically-produced fencing material that barbed wire could be made at scale. Glidden's machine pulled two strands of wire tight around the barb, then wound the wires together around the regularly-spaced spikes.
Explanation:
got this from google which is accurate to your question
Answer:
3) the Muslim -Hindu riots and violence
Explanation:
Once it was decided that India should be granted independence everyone seemed happy and excited about it, but they were not aware that the country was going to be partitioned. India was partitioned into two nations, India and Pakistan (West and East), based on the dominant religion. The reason for the partition was to avoid conflicts between the two groups, but they occurred nonetheless immediately after the independence. Both the Hindus and the Muslims were not pleased, so they started to riot and attack each other, with the end result being a refugee crisis. Millions of people were dislocated, lost their homes and families, or lost their lives.
Answer: the benefits and risks of abolishing the elctoral college are that for one we are going to start off with the benefits of it!
Benefits:
1.)The electoral college makes sure everyone is involved in choosing on who gets to be the next president during election time.
2.) The electoral college guarantees fairness to the outcome of the next president
Risks:
1.) It might slow down election process and things might be based more off of people being biased
2.) Everyone might not have the same say so on who the next president will be
In my opinion i think that the electoral college shouldnt be abolished because as much as a cliche as it is we really do rely on the electoral college on terms of fairness and getting everyones voice heard. I hope this helps you! please mark brainliest!
