The data in this chart goes back to 1983—move the timeline back to that point. You can see that both houses were much less representative that year—the House was 92.3% white; the Senate, 98.0%. Now, click through
the timeline to see how representation has changed over time. What can you conclude?
The House has seen more significant change in minority representation than the Senate.
Both the House and Senate have shown little change in their minority representation.
Ob.
The Senate has seen more significant change in minority representation than the House.
Ос.
Both the House and Senate have shown significant change in their minority representation.
Od.
3 points

The House has seen more significant change in minority representation than the Senate.

Explanation:

Even though both chambers of Congress in the United States of America have seen change in their racial makeup, they are still predominantly white.

However, what the charts over the years have shown is that the US Senate is lagging far behind the House of Representatives in terms of change to its composition and the inclusion of diversity groups such as women, Blacks, Hispanics and other races.

For instance, in the current House of Representative, there are 104 reps who are either African American, Asian or Hispanic whereas that figure stands at only 10 in the Senate. Yes the Senate has less members but that the difference is still plain to see.

this statement is true.

forests are public goods, available for everybody. when usage of such a good becomes interesting for consumers and its usage increases, there can be a risk of overexploitation. it is a non rival good therefore, if one person consumes the good it does not reduce the availability for subsequent consumers.

these caracteristics require the establishment of measures in order to prevent the destruction of a commonly owned space, for example, to restrict the amount of people that have access to the same time.

i dont believe in religion. lets all be peace