Under the articles of confederation, if virginia had ten thousand citizens and delaware had five thousand citizens, how many votes would each state have in the legislature? a) virginia would have ten, and delaware would have five. b) virginia would have one, and delaware would have five. c) virginia would have one, and delaware would have one. d)virginia would have three, and delaware would have two.

The answer is "C", Virginia would have one, and Delaware would have one.

Under the Articles of Confedarations, the states were considered equals and each state would be entitled to one vote, regardless of its size or population.

(C) Virginia would have one, and Delaware would have one.

Further Explanations:

The articles that were written within the Constitutional convention in 1787 reflected the need for a strong Federal government for the United States.  So a new agreement was formulated, signed by all the 13 foremost States of the United States that also served as the first constitution of the United States. The article was named as the Article of Confederation that came into effect on 1st March 1881 after the ratification of all the States. It acted to preserve of  Sovereignty and Independence of the States. The Constitution gave a new national identity to the citizens of the new state, calling them Americans. It also formulated the various rights and responsibilities of the new citizens, the powers of the newly-formed governmental organizations. The government was organized on the principles of a Confederation, for the purpose of maintaining regional autonomy.

As per the Article of confederation, Virginia was sanctioned one, and Delaware one vote in the legislative elections, although Virginia was having 10 thousand citizens and Delaware was having five thousand citizens overall.

Learn More  

Answer Details:

Grade: High school

Subject: US History

Chapter: Article of Confederation

Keywords: Article of Confederation, Constitutional Convention, United States, ratification, Sovereignty, Independence, Virginia, Delaware, citizens, principles of a Confederation

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is