Answer:
After ratification of the 13th amendment to the US Constitution, the main task of the radical Republicans was the adoption of the Civil Rights Bill and the development of the text of the future 14th amendment. These legislative acts were to be the next step on the way to the emancipation of the Black population of the Union. Member of the House of Representatives Thaddeus Stevens and Senator William Fessenden led the work on the 14th amendment. However, members of the Republican Party in 1866 divided on the list of those rights that it was planned to give former slaves. At the same time, the radical wing consisted of politicians who, with the help of the nation-state, wanted to guarantee the Black population equal rights in politics and equal opportunities in a free labor economy. However, conservative Republicans, for whom granting former slaves the right to vote even ten years later was a radical step, did not support this initiative. Since Stevens could not neglect the votes of the conservatives, on April 28, 1866 he submitted to the Committee on Reconstruction a text that excluded this provision. A draft of 14th amendment approved by the committee was submitted to both houses of Congress on April 30, 1866. Ratification of the 14th amendment to the US Constitution occurred on July 9, 1868, two years after its adoption by Congress. The first southern state to approve and ratify this amendment on July 9, 1866 was Tennessee. Thanks to this, on July 24, 1866, the state was reinstated as a member of the Union, and its representatives became full members of Congress. Further South Reconstruction activities covered ten former rebel states.
This amendment was a compromise that could temporarily unite representatives of different movements of the Republican Party in Congress. A radical solution to the issue of suffrage for the Black population did not find support among conservatives, and without their votes the amendment had no chance of adoption.
Explanation:
Answer:
To reduce soft money contributions to political parties.
it has caused spending by interest groups to increase
Explanation:
giving money to political campaigns is considered free speech:
in "citizen united v fec" the supreme court said because corporations giving money to political campaigns is considered free speech and the government cant restrict it. giving money is protected under the first amendment
Soft money is unregulated donations to political parties for general "party-building" purposes, not the support of a particular candidate so it avoid various legal limitations
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act aka McCain-Feingold Act is a major amendment of the Federal Election Campaign Act 1971 passed by the US congress in 2002. Its goal was to reduce the increased use of soft money to fund advertising by political parties.
brainly.com/question/11364371
investopedia
wikipedia
Both tried to limit power and gave people certain rights.
Answer:
can you attatch the map?
Explanation:
I will edit my answer after
Answer: the answer is A i just did it :)
Explanation:
