1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
JulijaS [17]
3 years ago
13

32. What German action demonstrated an incomplete understanding of history?

History
1 answer:
grigory [225]3 years ago
3 0
The German revolution
You might be interested in
Southern colonists grew rice tobacco silk cotton and what else
Georgia [21]
They also grew wheat and grain

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Please help me asappp it’s important
Ainat [17]

Answer:

I believe its B

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
What is the reign of Louis xiv, the government in France is
Nonamiya [84]
A. absolute monarchy
7 0
3 years ago
The Lambeth<br> Gas-Work's
Mkey [24]

Answer:?

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Hep me out ! - What are the pros and cons of laws that regulate campaign finance?
neonofarm [45]

Answer:

Explanation:

PRO : (1) Current federal contribution limits have not been adjusted for inflation in more than 20 years. The maximum individual contribution -- set at $1,000 in 1974 -- is worth approximately $300 in 1996 dollars. Candidates need to raise more than 3 times what they did 22 years ago to achieve the same result.

CON : (1) Only a small percentage of citizens can afford to give $1,000 or more to a candidates. Increasing the contribution limit or abolishing it altogethermight magnify the influence that wealthy individuals and groups have over elected officials.

PRO : (2) Studies show that PACs and related organizations prefer to give money to incumbent candidates, not challengers. Raising contribution limits might help challengers raise enough money to get their campaigns off the ground.

CON : (2) Because PACs and wealthy individual contributors favor incumbents, there is no reason to believe that challengers will have an easier time raising money from those same sources if limits are lifted.

PRO : (3) Candidates would spend less time fundraising, and more time meeting citizens and tending to their official duties.

CON : (3) Campaign finance problems would not be resolved by adding more money to the current system or doing nothing at all. We are much more likely to succeed if we build on what works in our current system.

PRO : (4) Given the escalating cost of political communications, especially the cost of TV advertising, candidates need more money than ever to communicate effectively with voters.

CON : (4) People who are wealthy enough to spend lots of money on political activities that are not limited by current campaign finance laws (like soft money, independent expenditures) will continue to do so, making higher limits as easy to evade legally as current limits.

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • The largest and most influential Islamic state in history was the Ottoman Empire.
    7·1 answer
  • Match the words with their definitions. 1. example of a city which was founded as a fort with safety in mind Sam Houston 2. exam
    13·2 answers
  • How was europe able to recover from the devastation from world war 2?
    9·2 answers
  • What did the federal reserve act signed by president Woodrow Wilson in 1913, establish
    11·2 answers
  • Who was General Hideki Tojo, and how did he lead his country to violence?
    8·1 answer
  • Which is not an enumerated power of Congress?
    15·1 answer
  • 9. Bakit
    15·1 answer
  • How many people is their in the world
    13·1 answer
  • What rights did the guarantee for Americans?
    8·2 answers
  • How did David Farragut impact the civil war?
    7·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!