Answer:
Competition between organizational forms manifests itself in political contention over the law. The authors analyze the political
strength and organization of the groups that supported and opposed
state anti-chain-store laws. The enactment of these laws depended
on intrastate political activity and the interstate diffusion of antichain-store legislation. The repeal process relied on supra state activity, as nationally organized pro-chain-store forces shifted the
arena of contention to the Supreme Court and forged national alliances with labor unions and agricultural cooperatives. In both
enactment and repeal, the political resources and strategies of organizational forms interacted with existing institutions to determine
the trajectory of institutional change.
Explanation:
Act sought to curb the power of Labour unions which had been given greater power under the Wagner act.
Explanation:
Charles Craver explains the intent of Congress to pass the Tart-Hartley Act. It was done to curb the overarching power of the labour unions and labour bosses in a bid to protect the workers. The act was passed by congressmen Fred A Hartley and his republican colleague who have felt the need for curbing the Wagner act which had provided over-arching powers to the labour unions.
Under the Taft-Hartley Act, not only the right of workers to form unions was protected but also member’s right to defy the union leaders to call for territorial strikes or to take harmful action against workers was expanded. In a nutshell, the act cut short the power of the union to subdue the economic growth prospects, profits as well as opportunities of the individual worker.
Several Japanese Americans were forced to leave their homes and families to go to internment camps since America was paranoid about Japanese spies.
