Answer: Because each state was looking out for its personal interests in regard to representation in Congress.
Details:
The Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise both focused on the representation of states in Congress. Both of these compromises were devised during the United States Constitutional Convention in 1787.
- The Great Compromise resolved a dispute between small population states and large population states. The large population states wanted representation in Congress to be based on a state's population size. The smaller states feared this would lead to unchecked dominance by the big states; they wanted all states to receive the same amount of representation. The Great Compromise created a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature. Representation in the House of Representatives would be based on population. In the Senate, all states would have the same amount of representation, by two Senators.
- The Three-Fifths Compromise was a way of accounting (somewhat) for the population of slaves in states that permitted slavery. For taxation and representation purposes, the question was whether slaves should count in the population figures. (They were not considered voting citizens at that time.) The Three-Fifths Compromise said that three out of every five slaves could be counted when determining a state's population size for determining how many seats that state would receive in the House of Representatives.
Scholars played numerous roles in the beginning of the italian renaissance but perhaps the most significant is that they spread the ideas of the books that made everything possible.
<span><span>
</span></span>
Champlain led them to New France. :)
Answer: A. Voters are more likely to participate in a presidential election than in a primary.
This table shows the voter turnout in percentages in different states, for both the Republican primary and the general election.
Option A is correct because the percentages are higher for the general election than for the primary in every state.
Option B and Option D assumes that the numbers represented are number of people, instead of <u>percentages</u>. We have no way of knowing what the absolute number of voters is per state.
Option C concludes the opposite of what the data shows.
Low paying job because he is only earning min. wage.
