<span>at the end of World War II, the farm economy once again faced the challenge of overproduction. Technological advances, such as the introduction of gasoline- and electric-powered machinery and the widespread use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers, meant production per hectare was higher than ever. To help consume surplus crops, which were depressing prices and costing taxpayers money, Congress in 1954 created a Food for Peace program that exported U.S. farm goods to needy countries. Policy-makers reasoned that food shipments could promote the economic growth of developing countries. Humanitarians saw the program as a way for America to share its abundance. In the 1960s, the government decided to use surplus food to feed America's own poor as well. During President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty, the government launched the federal Food Stamp program, giving low-income persons coupons that could be accepted as payment for food by grocery stores. Other programs using surplus goods, such as for school meals for needy children, followed. These food programs helped sustain urban support for farm subsidies for many years, and the programs remain an important form of public welfare -- for the poor and, in a sense, for farmers as well.
But as farm production climbed higher and higher through the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, the cost of the government price support system rose dramatically. Politicians from non-farm states questioned the wisdom of encouraging farmers to produce more when there was already enough -- especially when surpluses were depressing prices and thereby requiring greater government assistance.
The government tried a new tack. In 1973, U.S. farmers began receiving assistance in the form of federal "deficiency" payments, which were designed to work like the parity price system. To receive these payments, farmers had to remove some of their land from production, thereby helping to keep market prices up. A new Payment-in-Kind program, begun in the early 1980s with the goal of reducing costly government stocks of grains, rice, and cotton, and strengthening market prices, idled about 25 percent of cropland.
Price supports and deficiency payments applied only to certain basic commodities such as grains, rice, and cotton. Many other producers were not subsidized. A few crops, such as lemons and oranges, were subject to overt marketing restrictions. Under so-called marketing orders, the amount of a crop that a grower could market as fresh was limited week by week. By restricting sales, such orders were intended to increase the prices that farmers received.</span>
The Scopes Trial reveled a split between the scientific and religious community.
In this case, John T. Scopes was arrested. Scopes, a substitute teacher, was arrested for teaching the students about the theory of evolution. This broke a Tennessee state law, which stated that only creationism should be taught. After he was arrested, Scopes was put on trial.
Many members of the science community supported Scopes, as they see the theory of evolution as an important concept in understanding how humans evolved. On the other hand, members of the religious community wanted Scopes punished. This is because his teachings went against their religious beliefs.
The Warren Court made decisions regarding segregation and civil liberties. The most famous court decision was Brown v. Board of Education which ended school segregation in America and began a wave of desegregation decisions. These decisions created uproar in the South and cause military intervention at times. Miranda v. Arizona was another famous Warren Court decision which better defined the Fifth Amendment and how a person must be informed on their rights when arrested. These cases were often racial in nature redefining civil liberties and due process of the law.Yes the Warren Court did exceed its boundaries in issuing some of its decisions during the 1960s. For example the court gave its decision regarding women suffrage and it was not taken well by many women of that time. Many women were forced to suffer the consequences of the decision given by the Warren Court in regards to women's suffrage.The Tonkin Gulf Resolution was a joint resolution which the United States Congress passed on August 7, 1964. It gave power to the president to use conventional military force without declaration of war. It basically gave more power to the president then checks and balances allow. In this case for the given question let us assume that it was the executive branch that had taken fore step and became more powerful. If such had happened the power resting upon the head of the society or the president would increase and the chances of being mistake in due to the presence of human emotions and flaws would come into action. The decisions taken by the agencies would be biased and hence the laws that would be made would not necessarily benefits the society. When the US Constitution was written, the States feared a strong Federal Government. Because of the three branches system the US Constitution created a new system that revolutionized Constitutions around the world: the Checks and Balances system. The Checks and Balances system is a system that the US Constitution created to give powers to each of those three branches to limit the power of the other branch. Each branch has typical and atypical powers, and those atypical powers are the ones that are used to limit the typical powers of other branches. Because of that, if any of the three branches exceeds its authority the other branches have the power to stop this power and return the thing to status quo ante. Example of this atypical powers is: The Power of Veto the President has, the Impeachment Power of the Congress and Power the judicial branch has to declare a law unconstitutional. As you can notice, the Constitution created a system that autoregulates itself so that power and democracy are stable. The Warren Court has caused social change but one thing that the warren court has impacted positivily is that it broadened the individual rights of accused criminals. yes there is ups and downs to the warren court and it was a big thing in the 19th century but remembering on how of a impact it was has gave us importance today because any case that had segregation and enough evidence was presented, then a law for segregation would be unconstitutional.
Answer:Three events in American political history have been called a corrupt bargain: the U.S. presidential election of 1824, the Compromise of 1877 and Gerald Ford's 1974 pardon of Richard Nixon.
Discoveries. In 1497, Cabot traveled by sea from Bristol to Canada, which he mistook for Asia. Cabot made a claim to the North American land for King Henry VII of England, setting the course for England's rise to power in the 16th and 17th centuries. John Cabot was born in Italy but sponsored to take a voyage in the New World by England. He took the first voyage in the belief of finding the shortest route to reach Asia from the northern part of America. John Cabot sails to the west to reach his destination. His discoveries led to the discovery and colonization by the British in Canada, Newfoundland, Labrador, and Cape Breton Island.
