Which explains a difference between the constitutional monarchy established in England and the absolute monarchy established in
Spain? (5 points) The people were the primary decision makers in England, while a small governing body held the majority of the power in Spain. There was a separation of powers among the political leaders in England, while the Spanish monarch held complete power over the people. The monarch held sole control over all decisions in England, while the monarch shared his power with a governing body in Spain. There was a single, democratically elected leader in England, while there was a dictator who held sole government power in Spain.
The difference between the constitutional monarchy established in England and the absolute monarchy established in Spain was that there was a single, democratically elected leader in England, while there was a dictator who held sole government power in Spain. However, it is important to note that the democratically elected leader of England at the time of the dictatorship, that both were independent of the monarchy. The Spanish royal family were still executives during Franco and the British royal family were still executives when prime ministers were in power.
10th amendment of the Bill of Rights dealt with limitations of power of federal government while the other amendments deal with liberties and freedom granted to citzens.
I would say that Gerald Ford’s connection to the Watergate scandal could be the fact that Ford pardoned Nixon after Nixon resigned and then went before Congress to justify his decision.
In addition, Ford was Nixon’s vice president. After Nixon resigned due to the Watergate Scandal, he became president.
He separated power from status and grandeur: secured the nobles' cooperation. Louis XIV required the nobles to live at the palace. This was like an opulent prison because Louis XIV required them to live there for part of the year. It weakened the nobles by accustoming them to opulence and decadent activity
