Answer:
Either D or C. (Hope it helps!!)
Explanation:
Answer:
he spread greek styles across the ancient world
Explanation:
You could likely answer this in a lot of different ways since it's a heated topic that is largely opinion based. Consider that "states rights" was a major claim of those that supported segregation during the Civil Rights movement when they did not want to abide by federal regulation to desegregate. Consider some of the hottest topics of our time today: gay marriage, abortion, gun laws, the death penalty all face conversation about state vs. federal. I would suggest picking one or two topics and going into some depth on why a state could view the fed government as overly interfering. I've given some started ideas below, but all would need a bit more research to be a complete answer.
For example:
Marriage is largely regulated by the states and today only 13 states will issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples; however, the federal government recognizes same sex marriages, meaning same-sex couple receive the same benefits such as federal tax or death benefits that a male/female couple would. Should this be decided at the state level- many states think so.
Abortion:
Similar story- abortion clinics are mostly regulated by the state, but the federal government has increasingly expanded its regulations. There is a bill called FACE, which says there can be action taken if someone (or an entire state) prevents a woman from having access to an abortion, yet it can be very hard for abortion clinics to operate in some states.
Gun laws: Like marriages, licenses to sell guns are handed out at the state level, but federal gun laws prohibit the sales of certain types of guns arguably good, but limiting tax revenue for states.
A current hot topic is medical marijuana regulation. Currently several states have essentially legalized the sale of marijuana and so far the federal government has not interfered... but surely they are likely to soon. Recently, the house of reps voted to stop the federal gov't from interfering with states regulating marijuana, which was a big deal since the fed gov't previous position was that there was no identified medical use for pot.
For all of these- once the gov't has made a law, it has ways of forcing states to comply. This is often when you'll hear terms like "stepping on our state's rights." For example, they can withhold federal funding for everything from construction projects to job creation. They can also reward good behavior by creating incentives and funding to reach milestones- such as with the Clean Air Act.
Answer:
Explanation:
As an organized movement, trade unionism (also called organized labor) originated in the 19th century in Great Britain, continental Europe, and the United States. In many countries trade unionism is synonymous with the term labor movement. Smaller associations of workers started appearing in Britain in the 18th century, but they remained sporadic and short-lived through most of the 19th century, in<u> part because of the hostility they encountered from employers and government groups</u> that resented this new form of political and economic activism. At that time unions and unionists were regularly prosecuted under various restraint-of-trade and conspiracy statutes in both Britain and the United States.
While union organizers in both countries faced similar obstacles, their approaches evolved quite differently: the British movement favored political activism, which led to the formation of the Labor Party in 1906, while <u>American unions pursued collective bargaining as a means of winning economic gains for their workers.</u>
<u></u>
<u>In the United States the labor movement was also adversely affected by the movement to implement so-called right-to-work laws, which generally prohibited the union shop, a formerly common clause of labor contracts that required workers to join, or pay service fees to, a union as a condition of employment.</u> Right-to-work laws, which had been adopted in more than half of U.S. states and the territory of Guam by the early 21st century, were promoted by economic libertarians, trade associations, and corporate-funded think tanks as necessary to protect the economic liberty and freedom of association of workers. They had the practical effect of weakening collective bargaining and limiting the political activities of unions by depriving them of funds. Certain other states adopted separate legislation to limit or prohibit collective bargaining or the right to strike by public-sector unions. In Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court held that public employees cannot be required to pay service fees to a union to support its collective-bargaining activities on their behalf.