The citizens were going out of control without a strong government. Hopefully that helps.
It is important that a channel plan ensures no two adjacent access points are on the same channel by:<u> Avoiding co-channel interference.</u>
<h3>What is co-channel interference?</h3>
Co-channel interference can be defined as the process in which frequency are used twice or when two devices are working on the same frequency at the same time.
To avoid Co-channel interference , the best thing is to ensure that each channel is designated with different or separate antennas.
Therefore it is important that a channel plan ensures no two adjacent access points are on the same channel by:<u> Avoiding co-channel interference.</u>
Learn more about Co-channel interference here:brainly.com/question/14829868
#SPJ1
Leonard Peltier - Chippewa activist who participated in the occupation of Pine Ridge
Jane Roe - pseudonym for the woman whose case was the topic of Roe v. Wade
Harvey Milk - the first openly gay politician in the United States
Phyllis Schlafy - lawyer who helped consolidate a conservative coalition in US politics
Eldridge Cleaver - activist who wrote The Ideology of the Black Panther Party
Cesar Chavez- labor organizer who helped form the United Farm Workers
Answer:
B.) Reduced.
Explanation:
The Reagan administration is sometimes thought to have reversed the growth of the welfare state by eliminating or shrinking welfare programs at all levels of government and by removing new re-distributional initiatives from the national agenda. This assault on the welfare state was motivated at least in part by philosophical considerations. Leaving aside questions of cost and efficacy, the new administration aimed to confine welfare payments to the “deserving poor” (the aged, children, the permanently disabled, and others who could not be expected to enter the work force) in order to reduce the distorting effects of welfare both in labor markets and on the moral character of recipients. In practice, the administration sought to reduce payments to those with relatively high incomes by tightening eligibility standards and by reducing benefit levels on various programs (Palmer and Sawhill 1982).