3-4 page MLA Format Battle Analysis on the Battle of Antietam. Attached is the format to follow and also the slide presentation I have already done. You must go off the slideshow but be more in depth and also ONLY use the references on the slide show.Format: The checklist is divided into four steps, each of which builds on the previous one(s) to provide a logical order for the study. The four steps are:In the first step, you decide what battle you are going to study. In the next two, you gather the information necessary for a thorough and balanced study, and organize it in a logical manner to facilitate analysis. In the last step, you analyze the information to derive “lessons learned.” Define the Subject/Evaluate the sources.Review the Setting (Set the Stage).Describe the Action.Assess the Significance of the Action. 3. Purpose: The battle analysis methodology is a guide to help ensure that important aspects of the study of a historical battle or campaign are not forgotten. It is not a rigid checklist that must be followed to the letter. You do not have to use every part of it in your study, but all of the elements of battle analysis should be considered. Do not let the flow of your study be disrupted by the format’s order.

You also submitted a one sentence summary of the article.For this assignment, write a summary paragraph about your chosen article. The summary should include:An introductory sentence that identifies the title of the article, who wrote it, and the main idea of the article.At least 3-5 body sentences that identify supporting details and any questions the article left unanswered.A sentence that comments on the effectiveness of the article's conclusion.A concluding sentence that restates the main idea and provides closure for the paragraph.An APA style citation for the article. For more information on APA, click on the Resources tab in this course. Use of appropriate, standard grammar and mechanics, as well as careful proofing. The final product should be relatively error-free. Clem, C. (2010). You've got jail. American Jails, 24(5), 9-17. Retrieved from https://www.aja.org/advertising/jailmagazine/defau...

Chapter 14 Discussion What are the advantages and disadvantages of having so many levels of subnational governments in the United States? Explain. Do term limits seem to have more advantages or disadvantages? Defend your answer. Respond to at least 2 other students' posts. Chapter 14 Learning Objectives: Identify parts of the Constitution that grant power to the national government and parts that support states’ rights Identify two fiscal policies by which the federal government exerts control over state policy decisions Compare the costs and benefits of term limits Remember to incorporate the course readings to form a foundation for your responses. Additionally, you must properly cite the course text (Krutz, 2020, page number). Consult the Discussion Grading Guidelines for additional details. Please respond by 7/21/2021 so IU can send you my peers posts. Reading material below https://egcc.instructure.com/courses/19684/files/4...  First peer below The advantage of having many subnational governments in the United States is that they keep each other in check, and they do not spiral out of control. Such as state level and federal level both have the same amount of power but they both keep each other in check. The disadvantage is that when a law wants to get passed it will take longer to go through all the proper channels. The term limits in our government are key to making sure our politicians are not making a career out of our office. Term limits will shift there focus off of re election and more to the people that put them in that seat the disadvantage is that these same lawmakers that are trying to pass their own agenda will have to pass a bill limiting there own term. Second peer below Before the ratification of the Constitution, the states held more power than the government. Restricting the national governments power gave states freedom from the government. With this current structure, Congress was unable to conduct business or ensure financial stability. Eventually, framers settled on a system in which power would be shared (Krutz, 2019, pg. 522). The national government had its core duties, the state government had their duties, and the rest was equally shared. This is referred to as federalism (Krutz, 2019, pg. 523). The federal government was given more power when the President was head of the executive branch, and the Supreme Court became head of the judicial branch. The expressed powers given to the president and Congress were clearly spelled out in the Constitution under Article I, Section 8 and Article II, Sections 2 and 3 (Krutz, 2019, pg. 523). In addition, the national government was given implied powers which were not clearly stated. States were given powers independent of those enjoyed by the national government (Krutz, 2019, pg. 523). States now had the power to establish local governments and control how they functioned and what responsibilities they were given. States were also given the power to ratify amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Twenty-First amendment was the only one ratified using the state ratifying convention method (Krutz, 2019, pg. 523). The Tenth Amendment was created to give States reserved powers. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people.” The States also have concurrent powers. Include in these powers is the right to collect income tax, building and maintaining interstates and highways, and enforcing laws (Krutz, 2019, pg. 524). Growing financial resources gave the federal government increased power over subnational governments (Krutz, 2019, pg. 526). The government was able to decide what terms and conditions states needed to meet to qualify for financial assistance. In 1995, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act was made to create transparency. This act requires the Congressional Budget Office to provide information about the cost of a proposed government mandate that exceeds a specific threshold before the bill can be taken to congress (Krutz, 2019, pg. 526). In 1996 the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act was passed. This was known as the welfare reform bill (Krutz, 2019, pg. 526). The federal government reduced its funding for the program and in exchange states gained more power over how it was implemented (Krutz, 2019, pg. 526). States were able to set “more restrictive work requirements, place caps on the number of family members who can receive aid and limit the amount of time they can receive assistance” (Krutz, 2019, pg. 526-527). Term limits restrict the amount of time a member can serve in the state legislature by capping either lifetime service or the number of consecutive terms (Krutz, 2019, pg. 546). Today fifteen states have imposed term limits on their house and state senate members. With a consecutive term limit, a member can only serve for a specific amount of time. If the member wants to serve another term, they must rerun for office (Krutz, 2019, pg. 546). Some states have a lifetime ban. In this case, members are only able to run in office for the given time frame and are not allowed to rerun for office (Krutz, 2019, pg. 546). People who agreed with the idea of term limits felt that “new blood” was needed to get new ideas and perspectives into lawmaking. Supporters also hoped that term limits would push members to make good on public policy (Krutz, 2019, pg. 547). Other supporters hoped that term limits would bring in more diversity, more women, members of minority party, and racial and ethnic minority groups (Krutz, 2019, pg. 547). Though there are many advantages, there are also disadvantages. There is no statistical significance that term limits create more diversity. Term limits can affect the power structure between legislative and executive branches (Krutz, 2019, pg. 548). This makes legislators more likely to gain information from lobbyists about legislation. In turn, interest groups can push policies that favor their organizations. Finally, voter enthusiasm is affected. If there is a member they like, they may be upset about the possibility of them not being able to run for office again (Krutz, 2019, pg. 549). Yes, there are pros and cons to term limits but I believe it works.