1933: New Deal / cooperative federalism / marble cake federalism cause a change in the makeup of the power balance between local, state and national goverment in the following way
Explanation:
- The United States moved from dual federalism to cooperative federalism in the 1930s. National programs would increase the size of the national government and may not be the most effective in local environments. Cooperative federalism does not apply to the Judicial branch of the government.
- Each level of government is dominant within its own sphere. ... Marble cake federalism – Conceives of federalism as a marble cake in which all levels of government are involved in a variety of issues and programs, rather than a layer cake, or dual federalism, with fixed divisions between layers or levels of government.
- As a theory, dual federalism holds that the federal and state governments both have power over individuals but that power is limited to separate and distinct spheres of authority, and each government is neither subordinate to nor liable to be deprived of its authority by the other.
- The first, dual federalism, holds that the federal government and the state governments are co-equals, each sovereign. In this theory, parts of the Constitution are interpreted very narrowly, such as the 10th Amendment, the Supremacy Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Commerce Clause
- The advantages of this system are that it protects local areas and jurisdictions from the overreach of the federal government. The framers of the Constitution were afraid that the federal government would have too much power, and this system was a means of preventing that situation from developing.
- Historically, the definitive example of dual federalism is the United States. ... These states can check the federal government through judicial action. Europe, too, has a system of dual federalism, albeit set up with state traditions. The European Union (EU) is organized into a federalist government with limited powers.
<span>Okay, as I read the history, the Stamp Act and the Townshend Acts were both intended to tax the colonies to help Britain pay off it's debts from the War. The Declaration did not impose any new taxes, but justified making the colonies more dependent on the Crown/British government, so I interpret that as "justification" for the taxes. It's not a word that was used at the time, but our interpretation of it in our own time.(The answer is D) Your welcome!</span>
He wants to protect himself
<span>The Deepwater
Horizon oil spill affected an area of approximately 2,500 to 68,000
square miles, affecting the Gulf Coast of Mexico, especially the states
of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. In
2013, in the state of Louisiana, they managed to eliminate 4,900,000
pounds of oil from beaches, twice the amount of oil collected in 2012.
The economies of the Gulf Coast states were terribly affected, as the
spill affected the industries, of which, the inhabitants of the coast of the four affected states depended. <span>More than a third of US waters in the Gulf were closed to fishing, to avoid further pollution.</span></span>
He also called for the Japanese<span> Diet to pass a new election law to provide for free </span>democratic<span> elections, including, for the </span>first<span> time in the </span>history<span> of </span>Japan<span>, the right of women to vote. In addition, under MacArthur's direction, the growth of labor unions was encouraged, large landholdings were broken up and the education ...</span>
