Answer:
Explanation:
The issue of health care reforms did not start when President Obama took office. The debate on healthcare has been ongoing. There have been many attempts in an attempt to bring revolutions in healthcare. The past efforts have failed in the past due to weak regimes, insufficient lobbying, differences in ideology and maybe the complexity of the issue. The issue of reforms was started in the 1800 but started being debated upon in the 1930s. The Great Depression was the most contributing factor that lead to the bringing up of this issue. This is because many people did not have employment and could not afford healthcare. There was therefore a need to have affordable healthcare.
The issue of health care reform has been taken differently by the Republicans and Democrats. Republicans believe that the healthcare reforms will meant that there will be more taxes that will be imposed for the wealthy in the society. They believe that it is the wealthy who create jobs invest. If they are heavily taxed, this will mean that they will no longer be able to create more jobs and invest. They state that if the program is to be introduced, then it should not eat into the hard work of the wealthy. This would be punishing the wealthy group in the society. Another view of the republicans is that the ideology is totally wrong. They believe that the government should not control the lives of citizens too much. They believe that individuals should work in order to get what they want in life. Another issue with republicans is that of deficit of American budget. They argue that healthcare reforms will be carried out at the expense of the already fleecing budget.
The views of the Democrats is that health care insurance is part of the promise for America that was made by the forefathers. They believe that each and every citizen should have access to quality healthcare. They believe that there should be no cancelation of coverage basing on family or gender issues. Another issue that they advocate is that healthcare should not be privatized. The senior Americans should not be made to pay more for the needy in the society. They believe that the less privileged in the society should be taken care of by all Americans. The third issue that the Democrats advocate for is that they advocate for wider coverage and reduced healthcare costs. They believe that many people should have access to healthcare at rates which are reduced and affordable (Brookham, 2006 73).
The congress are against the reforms that are being advocated in healthcare. They do not approve the approach that health care is being taken. This is something that is bringing some discord in the congress.
The past presidents of the United States have had varying opinions on healthcare reforms. Most presidents wanted to move away from state type of healthcare to a more comprehensive one that could be integrated with social security. Roosevelt and Truman failed to bring these implementations in the health care sector. This was because employers were giving better benefits and there was promises that it could get better with time. There was no cooperation with the big corporations and the reforms failed. President Clinton came up with the issue of reforms in the 1990s. He came up with The Health Security Act which was universal and the government would be tasked with running it. He argued that the costs would be cut down completely. Many people supported some part of the initiative of Clinton but waited for the parts they did not like to be changed before fully supporting it. Under President Obama, there are still issues that need to be addressed in the healthcare reforms. There are strides that have been made in reforms. The Obama administration have succeeded to enable people not to be excluded from any coverage because of conditions which are preexisting.
N Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of a Louisiana law passed in 1890 "providing for separate railway carriages for the white and colored races." The law, which required that all passenger railways provide separate cars for blacks and whites, stipulated that the cars be equal in facilities, banned whites from sitting in black cars and blacks in white cars (with exception to "nurses attending children of the other race"), and penalized passengers or railway employees for violating its terms.
<span>Homer Plessy, the plaintiff in the case, was seven-eighths white and one-eighth black, and had the appearance of a white man. On June 7, 1892, he purchased a first-class ticket for a trip between New Orleans and Covington, La., and took possession of a vacant seat in a white-only car. Duly arrested and imprisoned, Plessy was brought to trial in a New Orleans court and convicted of violating the 1890 law. He then filed a petition against the judge in that trial, Hon. John H. Ferguson, at the Louisiana Supreme Court, arguing that the segregation law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids states from denying "to any person within their jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," as well as the Thirteenth Amendment, which banned slavery. </span>
<span>The Court ruled that, while the object of the Fourteenth Amendment was to create "absolute equality of the two races before the law," such equality extended only so far as political and civil rights (e.g., voting and serving on juries), not "social rights" (e.g., sitting in a railway car one chooses). As Justice Henry Brown's opinion put it, "if one race be inferior to the other socially, the constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane." Furthermore, the Court held that the Thirteenth Amendment applied only to the imposition of slavery itself. </span>
<span>The Court expressly rejected Plessy's arguments that the law stigmatized blacks "with a badge of inferiority," pointing out that both blacks and whites were given equal facilities under the law and were equally punished for violating the law. "We consider the underlying fallacy of [Plessy's] argument" contended the Court, "to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it." </span>
<span>Justice John Marshall Harlan entered a powerful -- and lone -- dissent, noting that "in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens." </span>
<span>Until the mid-twentieth century, Plessy v. Ferguson gave a "constitutional nod" to racial segregation in public places, foreclosing legal challenges against increasingly-segregated institutions throughout the South. The railcars in Plessy notwithstanding, the black facilities in these institutions were decidedly inferior to white ones, creating a kind of racial caste society. However, in the landmark decision Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the "separate but equal" doctrine was abruptly overturned when a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that segregating children by race in public schools was "inherently unequal" and violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Brown provided a major catalyst for the civil rights movement (1955-68), which won social, not just political and civil, racial equality before the law. After four decades, Justice Harlan's dissent became the law of the land. Following Brown, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled racial segregation in public settings to be unconstitutional. </span>
The answer is <span>C.It was a poetic device favored by the young Soviet poets.</span>
The answer is 1 and 2/12th first you take the 2/3 into 8/12 and and the 2/4 into 6/12 and then you add them together to get 14/12. Then you simplify is to 1 and 2/12 and 2//12 into 1/6. I hope this helps.
