Percentage of US Homes with Electricity A bar graph titled Percentage of U S Homes with Electricity. The x axis shows the years 1910, 1920, 1930. The y axis shows the percentage of homes, from 0 to 90. For all homes: 1910, 10%; 1920, 35%; 1930, 67%. For urban homes: 1910, 10%; 1920, 48%; 1930, 83%. Which statement is supported by information presented in the chart? People owned fewer electrical appliances in the 1920s than in earlier decades. More rural homes than urban homes had access to electricity in the 1920s. The number of houses with electricity would decrease after the 1930s. Demand for electricity increased in the 1920s and 1930s.

The information that is true as per the attached table is the demand for electricity increased in the 1920s and 1930s in rural and urban.

The data shows that demand was increasing from 10 percent to 67 percent in rural areas while it increased upto 83 percent in urban areas. However, there is more electricity demand seen in urban areas as compared to rural regions.

It is because the industrial works are more in urban areas while increased electricity demand in rural areas is due to the advanced use of agricultural technology.

Learn more about electricity demand trends here:

link

The answer to this question is given below in the explanation section

Explanation:

In this question, a scenario is given about inferencing information from the given data. The data that is given in the question about the percentage of US Homes with Electricity and it is depicted in the bar-graph as attached to this solution.

In this scenario, Which statement is supported by the information presented in the chart?

People owned fewer electrical appliances in the 1920s than in earlier decades.

More rural homes than urban homes had access to electricity in the 1920s. The number of houses with electricity would decrease after the 1930s.

Demand for electricity increased in the 1920s and 1930s.

The correct answer to this question is 3, that is the demand for electricity increased in the 1920s and 1930s in rural and urban.

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