1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Debora [2.8K]
3 years ago
6

What were Andrew jackson beliefs regarding voting

History
2 answers:
Anestetic [448]3 years ago
7 0
What were Andrew jackson beliefs regarding voting <span>all adult males she be allowed to vote. 

Later on, womens suffrage (as known as womens right to vote) was granted. </span>
spayn [35]3 years ago
4 0
<span>The answer if B.  All white males should be allowed to vote.  This happened around 1800 to 1830.  At this time older states dropped their restriction policies and new states did not have such policies.  It was well-accepted movement.  The only problem was in Rhode Island during the Dorr Rebellion in the 1840s where people had to be forced to go to the polls to vote.  Still, during this period, voter’s turnout increased rapidly by 80%.  Even the introduction of the national convention by the Anti-Masonic Party who were opponents of Jackson that chose a party’s president and vice president also helped increase votes.</span>
You might be interested in
What was the goal of the Ku Klux Klan during the 1870s and 1920s?
defon

Answer:

C

Explanation:

The kkk wanted to keep African Americans in the position they used to be in, so they tried to suppress any social progress regarding race

5 0
2 years ago
Why did southern state governments create poll taxes literacy tests and grandfather clauses apex?
eduard

To restrict the ability of African Americans to exercise voting rights.


The black community had less access to education than whites even after slavery was ended; thus their literacy rates were lower.  They also experienced much poverty because of prejudice against them in the economic system of the country, so poll taxes could keep them from going to the polls to vote.  The "grandfather clauses" were exemptions granted by some states to those whose forefathers ("grandfathers") had full voting rights prior to the Civil War, so if there were poor or illiterate whites, they could vote freely while blacks (whose ancestors had been slaves) were subjected to the laws restricting their voting ability.  


These sorts of restrictions against black voters prompted much of the activism of the civil rights movement that began in the middle of the 20th century.

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
2. What is one weakness of the Articles of Confederation? (10 points)
puteri [66]
The major downfall of the Articles of Confederation was simply weakness. The federal government, under the Articles, was too weak to enforce their laws and therefore had no power. The Continental Congress had borrowed money to fight the Revolutionary War and could not repay their debts.
4 0
3 years ago
Since there are a total of 435
lapo4ka [179]
There are 538 total electors
6 0
3 years ago
Why do people support the Right to Bear Arms amendment?
EleoNora [17]

Answer:

Explanation:Modern debates about the Second Amendment have focused on whether it protects a private right of individuals to keep and bear arms, or a right that can be exercised only through militia organizations like the National Guard. This question, however, was not even raised until long after the Bill of Rights was adopted.

Many in the Founding generation believed that governments are prone to use soldiers to oppress the people. English history suggested that this risk could be controlled by permitting the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries. For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or other emergencies, the government could rely on a militia that consisted of ordinary civilians who supplied their own weapons and received some part-time, unpaid military training.

The onset of war does not always allow time to raise and train an army, and the Revolutionary War showed that militia forces could not be relied on for national defense. The Constitutional Convention therefore decided that the federal government should have almost unfettered authority to establish peacetime standing armies and to regulate the militia.

This massive shift of power from the states to the federal government generated one of the chief objections to the proposed Constitution. Anti-Federalists argued that the proposed Constitution would take from the states their principal means of defense against federal usurpation. The Federalists responded that fears of federal oppression were overblown, in part because the American people were armed and would be almost impossible to subdue through military force.

Implicit in the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions. First, that the proposed new Constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and militia. Second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. They disagreed only about whether an armed populace could adequately deter federal oppression.

The Second Amendment conceded nothing to the Anti-Federalists’ desire to sharply curtail the military power of the federal government, which would have required substantial changes in the original Constitution. Yet the Amendment was easily accepted because of widespread agreement that the federal government should not have the power to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms, any more than it should have the power to abridge the freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of religion.

Much has changed since 1791. The traditional militia fell into desuetude, and state-based militia organizations were eventually incorporated into the federal military structure. The nation’s military establishment has become enormously more powerful than eighteenth century armies. We still hear political rhetoric about federal tyranny, but most Americans do not fear the nation’s armed forces and virtually no one thinks that an armed populace could defeat those forces in battle. Furthermore, eighteenth century civilians routinely kept at home the very same weapons they would need if called to serve in the militia, while modern soldiers are equipped with weapons that differ significantly from those generally thought appropriate for civilian uses. Civilians no longer expect to use their household weapons for militia duty, although they still keep and bear arms to defend against common criminals (as well as for hunting and other forms of recreation).

5 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Franklin Roosevelt was first elected in ________. <br> A) 1933<br> B) 1932<br> C) 1928
    11·2 answers
  • How did the introduction of the horse to north america change the native american way of life
    10·2 answers
  • Which of the following statementsbest describes the Puritans' attitude towards other religions? 
    5·1 answer
  • How did the ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut start the debate over reproductive rights?
    10·2 answers
  • Briefly describe the duties of the secretary of state in state government.
    7·2 answers
  • Which statement best describes the difference between a statute and case law? A statute is a law created by lawmakers; case law
    7·1 answer
  • The powers not [given] to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
    14·1 answer
  • What is the biggest difference in citizen participation in government between ancient Athens and the modern United States
    7·1 answer
  • "A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions tell me that's t
    10·1 answer
  • Which of the following is a First Amendment right?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!