1933: New Deal / cooperative federalism / marble cake federalism cause a change in the makeup of the power balance between local, state and national goverment in the following way
Explanation:
- The United States moved from dual federalism to cooperative federalism in the 1930s. National programs would increase the size of the national government and may not be the most effective in local environments. Cooperative federalism does not apply to the Judicial branch of the government.
- Each level of government is dominant within its own sphere. ... Marble cake federalism – Conceives of federalism as a marble cake in which all levels of government are involved in a variety of issues and programs, rather than a layer cake, or dual federalism, with fixed divisions between layers or levels of government.
- As a theory, dual federalism holds that the federal and state governments both have power over individuals but that power is limited to separate and distinct spheres of authority, and each government is neither subordinate to nor liable to be deprived of its authority by the other.
- The first, dual federalism, holds that the federal government and the state governments are co-equals, each sovereign. In this theory, parts of the Constitution are interpreted very narrowly, such as the 10th Amendment, the Supremacy Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Commerce Clause
- The advantages of this system are that it protects local areas and jurisdictions from the overreach of the federal government. The framers of the Constitution were afraid that the federal government would have too much power, and this system was a means of preventing that situation from developing.
- Historically, the definitive example of dual federalism is the United States. ... These states can check the federal government through judicial action. Europe, too, has a system of dual federalism, albeit set up with state traditions. The European Union (EU) is organized into a federalist government with limited powers.
Answer:
casual
Explanation:
HIV/aids is not spread through casual social contact
Accused person have the right to request a witness to APPEAR IN COURT.
The Sixth Amendment of the United States granted some rights to an accused person and these include the right of the person to know the person or group of persons who have brought accusations against him. The accused also have the right to request that his accusers should appear in court and this request must be granted by the accusers.
This passage is the epigraph to the novel, telling the reader what the book is intended to be and mapping out some of its basic stylistic and thematic ground. The statement that the book is not “an adventure” separates it from most war novels in that it will dispense with elements of romance and excitement in favor of a stark, unsentimental presentation. The clarification that “death is not an adventure to those who stand face to face with it” suggests that books that tell stories of war as though they were exciting adventures do not do justice to the actual experience of soldiers. Death may be an adventure to the reader, sitting comfortably at home, but it is anything but that to the soldier who is actually confronted with the possibility of being blown to pieces at any moment. The epigraph also declares that the book will be the story of an entire generation, one “destroyed by the war” even if not actually killed off by it. The epigraph thus opens the novel’s exploration of the effect of the war on those who fought it; war is a transforming force that not only injures and traumatizes but also annihilates selfhood. hope this helps
