Answer:
During an action potential, sodium channels first activate, driving the upstroke, and then inactivate, facilitating repolarization to the resting potential. The channel's a gate (activation gate) is closed at rest and activates in several steps to an open state after depolarization.
Explanation:
Answer:
All of these are part of the process except the Supreme Court. The Judicial Branch of the government is not involved in the budgetary process
Explanation:
cuz im smart :)
Answer:
1)Algal blooms can reduce the ability of fish and other aquatic life to find food and can cause entire populations to leave an area or even die. Harmful algal blooms cause thick, green muck that impacts clear water, recreation, businesses and property values.
2)The lake has changed over time for many reasons, most of which were caused by people. ... This would open up thousands of acres for cattle ranching, farming and urban development north of the lake. Disston made the first attempt to drain floodwaters by connecting the Caloosahatchee River to Lake Okeechobee.
3)Pollution from sugar-growing operations used to be a large contributor to the lake's problems, because the government let growers pump water from the lake, use it to irrigate their fields, and then pump it back into the lake, filled with fertilizer and chemicals.
5)advantage
Here are 6 reasons to look at proposal writing as a benefit instead of a chore.
Better project planning. Oftentimes, we see a dire need in our community and want to immediately solve it. ...
Building consensus. ...
More research. ...
Plan for monitoring and evaluation. ...
Improved marketing. ...
Get everything in writing.
disadvantage
A proposal will usually take longer to complete than a bankruptcy. Lowering your monthly payment means longer time paying back, however, if your situation improves, you CAN pay off a proposal early. Credit Rating is still affected. – A Consumer Proposal DOES affect your credit.
Explanation:
i did not find the answer the 4th question
I think it’s the last one
The U.S. Supreme Court hands down its decision on Sanford v. Dred Scott, a case that intensified national divisions over the issue of slavery.
In 1834, Dred Scott, a slave, had been taken to Illinois, a free state, and then Wisconsin territory, where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery. Scott lived in Wisconsin with his master, Dr. John Emerson, for several years before returning to Missouri, a slave state. In 1846, after Emerson died, Scott sued his master’s widow for his freedom on the grounds that he had lived as a resident of a free state and territory. He won his suit in a lower court, but the Missouri supreme court reversed the decision. Scott appealed the decision, and as his new master, J.F.A. Sanford, was a resident of New York, a federal court decided to hear the case on the basis of the diversity of state citizenship represented. After a federal district court decided against Scott, the case came on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which was divided along slavery and antislavery lines; although the Southern justices had a majority.
During the trial, the antislavery justices used the case to defend the constitutionality of the Missouri Compromise, which had been repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. The Southern majority responded by ruling on March 6, 1857, that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the territories. Three of the Southern justices also held that African Americans who were slaves or whose ancestors were slaves were not entitled to the rights of a federal citizen and therefore had no standing in court. These rulings all confirmed that, in the view of the nation’s highest court, under no condition did Dred Scott have the legal right to request his freedom. The Supreme Court’s verdict further inflamed the irrepressible differences in America over the issue of slavery, which in 1861 erupted with the outbreak of the American Civil War.
