Based on Joh Adam's full text on archive.org, is being President of the Senate. He described that he lost significance after having the role in a letter to Abigail. He described his position being held by the interest of other people. Being aware of political happenings and what would happen that the President would enter a war. He stands witness and said to have no power to do good nor evil.
Answer:
Once under British control, regulations were imposed on the colonies that allowed the colony to produce only raw materials and to trade only with Britain. Many colonists resented the Navigation Acts because they increased regulation and reduced their opportunities for profit, while England profited from colonial work.
Explanation:
Answer:
Partisan Elections
Explanation:
Elections are the local level are considered to be more partisan because political parties tend to have a stronger grip on local politics, and also because it is higher for a non-partisan or disrupting figure to overwhelm the party infraestructure and run as an independent at the local level.
This also causes a higher degree of party loyalty among citizens at the local level.
To escape the prosecution they faced in their homeland
Answer:
Let us assume that Jimmy Carter is an intelligent, decent, hardworking man. Assume, moreover, that he has appointed to his cabinet and sub-cabinet many men and women who are experienced and dedicated. How, then, can a president—certainly no less mentally alert than most past presidents—with many advisers of high caliber, produce such an undistinguished presidency?
It’s a puzzlement. And it cannot be accounted for by most of the explanations currently in vogue, such as: Carter’s an outsider who really doesn’t understand the levers of national governance; or Carter surrounds himself with a “Georgia Mafia” whose weaknesses are the same as his own; or Carter is a bad manager who hasn’t been able to sort out decisions that a president must make from those that should be settled at lower levels; or Congress is so uncontrollable that it will not allow any president to exercise the reins of leadership; or the bureaucracy has grown beyond the span of presidential control; or many of the nation’s problem’s are highly intractable; or even all these reasons taken together—although there is truth in all.
I would like to put forward another theory: The root of the problem is that Jimmy Carter is the first Process President in American history.
“Process President”—using a definition by Aaron Wildavsky and Jack Knott—means that Carter places “greater emphasis on methods, procedures and instruments for making policy than on the content of policy itself.”
Carter is an activist. He wants to do things. Yet his campaign statements should have warned us that save for the human rights thrust in foreign policy, his passion in government is for how things are done, rather than what should be done.
He believes that if the process is good the product will be good. In other words, if he sets up a procedure for making policy that is open, comprehensive (his favorite word), and involves good people, whatever comes out of this pipeline will be acceptable (within certain budgetary limits).
Explanation:
