Answer:
MetchelleAmbitious
Given the situation above regarding the reports made by an interest group about the poor performance of an executive branch agency, this is considered as an informal example of Checks and Balances political system. The answer to this is the third option.
Explanation:
The correct answer is c : Passed laws
<span>This was a declaration by the House of Commons of England reaffirming their right to freedom of speech in the face of King James' belief that they had no right to debate foreign policy. Many Members of Parliament were unhappy with James' foreign policy. They opposed the Spanish Match and wished for a war against Spain. The MPs believed that if they conceded that they had no right to debate matters which displeased the King, Parliament would be obsolete</span>
Answer:
D. Every time you fail to donate, another child misses a meal.
Explanation:
There are three central rhetorical approaches: pathos, logos, and ethos. Pathos is an appeal to emotion; logos, to logic; ethos, to credibility.
D is the best example of pathos because it doesn't use logic (like B, which cites a statistic) or credibility (like A, which claims that dentists, a respectable source, recommend brushing). It uses an emotional appeal in claiming that lack of donations is linked to child hunger. All of these can be very persuasive; it's important to know your audience!
Answer:
Business monopolies.
Explanation:
In the late 19th century and early 20th, most companies were looking to form monopolies. By decreasing or nullifying the competition, the business's success was assured.
As an example, the Standard Oil Company, founded by John D. Rockefeller was one of the most powerful monopolies of its time. He was able to dictate fixed products, pay whatever wages he wanted to pay to workers, and controlled the market since his competitors weren't remotely close to his manufacturing levels.
However, it didn't lack opposition. in 1890 United States Senator John Sherman, attained the passage of the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890, which allowed the Federal Government to break up any business who was in any way prohibiting competition. This act was widely used throughout the whole century, in the fight against monopolies.
