What is the 4 constitutions of the Philippines starting Malolos constitution to 1987 con.explain features.?
1. Malolos Constitution 1899 -first republican constitution in Asia - It was written in Malolos, Bulacan during the Spanish period - was written in Spanish - was proclaimed on January 20, 1899, which was enacted by the Malolos Constitution 2. Commonwealth and the Third Republic 1935 - It included the Philippine Organic Act of 1902 which had the bill of rights for Filipinos and the Philippine resident commissioners to represent the Philippines in the American Congress - It had the Jones Law (Philippine Act 1916) 3. Freedom Constitution- this was the constitution that paved way for the Fourth republic constitution (1987 Constitution) - was proclaimed by Cory Aquino right after the decline of Ferdinand Marcos' regime. 4. 1987 Constitution- this is the modern day constitution which we still use I hope that helps!
If the framers of the U.S. Constitution saw the state of the country today, how would they have written the document differently?
They could have made impeachment imperative in the case of an executive who requested the assistance of a foreign power to get elected. They could have been far more careful in their wording of the second amendment, tying the membership in a militia more explicitly to the right to bear arms so that it was understood that right was tied to the responsibility to prevent federal despotism through the several well-regulated state militias, and vice versa. They could have severely curtailed the multi-national corporation’s powers. They could have strongly restrained the executive branch in its foreign adventuring, and forbade foreign aid with political goals except in time of declared war. They could have forbidden undeclared wars. They could have provided a more robust taxation power and made clear the extra duty of the more financially blessed to provide for the downtrodden commensurate with that blessing’s gifts to them. This would have included a minimal standard of universal health care. They could have provided for the use of the mineral wealth of the nation to be sold for the benefit of all the people, and restricted monopolies. A limit on the number of its citizens who could be incarcerated at any given time. They could have legalized substance use, and taxed them as they did whiskey. They could have provided universal suffrage, and ended slavery and indentured servitude (including the practice of drafting athletes), and included the right to collectively bargain and strike. They could have severely curtailed the use of gerrymandering, if not outright abolishing it. They could have forbade the writing of government rules by corporations, and made it illegal to profit from one’s public office while in office and once out of office. They could have included a process for withdrawing from the union that was orderly and lengthy. They could have recognized the variety of sexual orientations and types of sexual beings that make up its citizenry as irrelevant to their legal treatment. They could have set a procedure for immigration and naturalization and forbade walls between us and our neighbors. But most of them were quite interested in their own wealth-gathering and prestige, aside from building a fair and equitable society, so it is questionable if any of these are “would have” done.
I need some help for a test coming upon the progress era, my book doesnt have alot of info so anything helps?
I was out of school for a while with shingles and need some help 1. What did progressives believe was the proper function of the govt in regards to society 2.How did progressives differ from the populists in the 1890s 3. What was a muckraker, what did they try to accomplish, who were some leading muckrakers 4 What types of reforms did the progressives want to make 5. what problems did cities typically have at this time, how did progressives want to solve thes problems 6. what political problems existed at this time, what political reforms did progressives want to acomplish 7 what did progressives want to accomplish for women? workers? how succesful were they 8.what was the progressive position on prohibition, how succesful were they in promoting this position 9.what was the progressives position on African-Americans, what was the impact of this position 10. who were 2 great African-American leaders of the progressive period, explain their differences
Do you consider the NFLs decision to force players to stand during the national anthem as a violation of the First Amendment?
No. You and NFL players have a right to free speech, in public places. These ballparks don’t meet the definition of public place.Further, the existing NFL Player’s Agreement already stipulated that players and coaches, etc. must stand at attention with helmets in their left hand during the anthem. Those who kneeled already were in violation of their own agreement.You have a right to free speech. You work for Company-A. You go to your local park, get up on your soap box, and shout to the world that Company-A is a horrible company, that their management are all crooks, etc. You have a right to do that. Police won’t arrest you. You won’t be thrown in jail. But it is entirely possible that you will be fired. That isn’t a violation of your free speech rights.