During the Constitutional Convention (1787, one of the issues of disagreement was how would states be represented in Congress.
People from larger states like Virginia, Massachusetts or Pennsylvania thought it would be unfair that each state were given the same number of representatives regardless of population, and argued that the best way to ensure equality among people within the states was to divide states' votes according to population, so the most populated states would have more votes.
This would affect the number of each state delegates sent to Congress and the degree of power of each state in the new government.
Also, larger states have more diverse population with their multiple needs. If the states only sent one delegate, they feared it could meet their needs.
Another reason has to do with taxation. Larger states would pay more taxes than smaller ones, because they had more human capital creating wealth. So relying on the promise of the American Revolution (taxation and representation) they argued that they should be represented in the Congress accordingly to the taxes they paid.
Answer:
Affirmative action policies
Explanation:
I hope that is one of you answer choices because you didn't provide any. I also hope the answer choices are the same as my question. It is the correct answer because every other choice is not a part of the Civil Rights Act. Please put answer choices next time to create less confusion. Thanks.
I believe To a naturalistic writer, a human is a (#2 devil).
I would say chief. It seems to make sense.
This simply suggests that the presidency is becoming more active when it comes to issuing commands to the government. This also most likely means that the president will be having a wider scope of authority of more sectors in the government which points out to the president having more say.
