Answer: b. Jose Navarro
Explanation:
José Antonio Navarro was one of the early proponents of Texas independence from Spain and then from Mexico. He forged a friendship with Stephen Austin (founder of Texas) as they worked to bring about Texas independence.
Being a native Texan, he represented Texas in the legislature of the state that Texas was part of at the time which was Coahuila y Tejas and he also represented them in the Federal Congress in Mexico City.
He is in the precontemplation stage of the transtheoretical model,where he shows no intention of changing their behavior, and does not see an behavior as a problem when asked.
This matched his case that he does not believe he will get a lung cancer from smoking cigarettes(does not see the behavior as an problem) and does not want to quit smoking(no intention of changing the behavior).
Hope it helps!
Answer:
Constitution of 1890
Explanation:
The constitution of 1890 put literacy test as a requirement for people before they were allowed to cast their votes during the election.
At that time, the constitution was designed to reduce the power of minorities vote in the government.
A lot of black citizens during that time period did not have access to education due to their poor economic condition. As a result, black communities had a high illiteracy rate compared to white communities. This made a lot of black people unable to cast of their votes and choose their representatives within the government.
One particular organization that fought for racial equality was the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) founded in 1909. For about the first 20 years of its existence, it tried to persuade Congress and other legislative bodies to enact laws that would protect African Americans from lynchings and other racist actions. Beginning in the 1930s, though, the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund began to turn to the courts to try to make progress in overcoming legally sanctioned discrimination. From 1935 to 1938, the legal arm of the NAACP was headed by Charles Hamilton Houston. Houston, together with Thurgood Marshall, devised a strategy to attack Jim Crow laws by striking at them where they were perhaps weakest—in the field of education. Although Marshall played a crucial role in all of the cases listed below, Houston was the head of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund while Murray v. Maryland and Missouri ex rel Gaines v. Canada were decided. After Houston returned to private practice in 1938, Marshall became head of the Fund and used it to argue the cases of Sweat v. Painter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma Board of Regents of Higher Education.
