All categories

3 years ago

What are the methods for amending the constitution in the US

History

1 answer:

mr_godi [17]3 years ago

8 0

Answer:

Article V of the Constitution provides two ways to propose amendments to the document. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress, through a joint resolution passed by a two-thirds vote, or by a convention called by Congress in response to applications from two-thirds of the state legislatures.

Explanation: "

Four Methods of Amending the U.S. Constitution

A two-thirds vote in both houses of the U.S. Congress. Ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

A two-thirds vote in both houses of U.S. Congress. ...

A national constitutional convention called by two-thirds of the state legislatures."

"The number of proposed amendments to the Constitution is an approximation for several reasons. Inadequate indexing in the early years of the Congress, and separate counting of amendments in the nature of a substitute, may obscure the total. It is also common for a number of identical resolutions to be offered on issues that have widespread public and congressional support. Finally, congressional rules limiting the number of cosponsors permitted for each proposed amendment may be a factor in the number of resolutions introduced."

You might be interested in

Those who settled in the first 13 colonies lived mainly in which ecosystem

jek_recluse [69]

Your answer would be Virginia

7 0

3 years ago

3. Why did sugar farmers bring African slaves to the Americas?

AlekseyPX

Because the only way (back then) to process and make sugar farms was through manual labor. Since the Americans didn't want to put effort onto their own sugar farms, Africans were forced to do the labor part for them.

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Which world region is still in the process of extending voting rights to women?

julia-pushkina [17]

The answer is ...............c

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Phoenicia did not have its own supply of ivory, so it traded for ivory with other regions, which meant that, for the Phoenicians

Norma-Jean [14]

A. import

Explanation:

here ya go! hope this helps ya :)

3 0

3 years ago

Contrast the picture of Justinian found in each excerpt from Procopius. How do you explain these two different views?

Vlad [161]

Answer:

The first impression - The Buildings - is political and governmental exposure, written during Justinian's lifetime. This kind of text was produced to promote the emperor's deeds, as a way to show to the further readings who was the Emperor. It's a public story wrote by a historian.

However, the second impression is personal. Procopius was seeing the emperor's private life, his behavior, his way to deal with the problems, and his temper. Procopius analyze Justinian's moral and conclude that he was a good person, but with some problems to control the anger and the ego.

I think that the main difference between these two excerpts is not only their nature - private and public - but also when they were written. The first is a public promotion during the emperor's lifetime, as a way to show his importance and glory. And the second was published after Justinian's death, and Procopius was not worried about reprisal. It's a personal point of view about private life.

Explanation:

Look at these excerpts, and see how Procopius describe the emperor:

#01: "In our own age there has been born the Emperor Justinian, who, taking over the State when it was harassed by disorder, has not only made it greater in extent but also much more illustrious, by expelling from it those barbarians who had from old pressed hard upon it. . . .Justinian created countless cities which did not exist before. And finding that the belief in God was, before his time, straying into errors and being forced to go in many directions, he completely destroyed all the paths leading to such errors, and brought it about that it stood on the firm foundation of a single faith."

On the other hand in the second text we have:

#02: "Justinian was dissembling, crafty, hypocritical, secretive by temperament, two-faced; a clever fellow with a marvelous ability to conceal his real opinion, and able to shed tears, not from any joy or sorrow, but employing them artfully when required in accordance with the immediate need, lying all the time; not carelessly, however, but confirming his undertakings both with his signature and with the most fearsome oaths, even when dealing with his own subjects."

3 0

3 years ago