Final answer:
The state-by-state approach of NAWSA's suffrage campaigns had benefits of gaining traction in certain states and attracting more women, but drawbacks of slow progress and lack of national uniformity.
Step-by-step explanation:
The National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) used a state-by-state approach in their campaigns for suffrage. This approach had both benefits and drawbacks. One benefit was that it allowed the suffrage movement to gain traction and success in certain states, such as Colorado, Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming, where women were granted the right to vote in state and local elections. Another benefit was that it helped to attract more women to the movement, particularly in the western states.
However, there were also drawbacks to this strategy. Progress was slow, and it took a significant amount of time and effort to secure the right to vote in each state individually. Additionally, the state-by-state approach created a patchwork of suffrage rights, with some states granting full suffrage while others only granted partial suffrage or no suffrage at all. This lack of consistency made it difficult for women to have a unified and equal voice across the country.
In summary, the state-by-state campaigns of NAWSA had the benefit of gaining traction and success in certain states, attracting more women to the movement, and eventually leading to the adoption of suffrage amendments. However, it also had drawbacks of slow progress, a patchwork of suffrage rights, and lack of national uniformity.