This is an estimate based on your percent correct on our practice tests. The official GED score conversion is not public, so your real score may differ. Scores of 145+ pass; 165+ is College Ready.
Question 1 of 35 · Structure and design of the U.S. government
Trade, Taxes and the President in the U.S. Constitution (1787)
The Constitution divides power over taxes and trade between Congress and the President. Read the four excerpts and the note that follows.
(1) Article I, Section 8: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;" …
(2) Article I, Section 8 (continued): "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
(3) Article I, Section 9: "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."
(4) Article II, Section 3: "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; … he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States."
Word help: duties and imposts = taxes on imported goods (also called tariffs); excises = taxes on goods made or sold at home; uniform = the same everywhere; expedient = useful or wise; "He" in Article II = the President.
Editor's note: Beginning with the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, Congress has passed laws that allow the President to negotiate trade agreements and, in certain situations, to raise or lower tariffs within limits that Congress sets. Congress can change or repeal these laws.
According to paragraph 1, which part of the national government has the power to place taxes, such as tariffs, on imported goods?
Hint
Find the subject of the sentence in paragraph 1: who "shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts"?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 1 (Article I, Section 8) says: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises." The word help explains that duties and imposts are taxes on imported goods, which are also called tariffs.
Step by step:
The sentence names Congress as the body that has this power.
Article I of the Constitution creates the legislative branch, which is Congress (the House and Senate).
The President is described in Article II, and paragraph 4 gives the President the job of recommending measures and carrying out laws, not creating taxes.
Courts and states are not given this power in the excerpt.
The correct answer is Congress, the legislative branch.
Tip: Article I = Congress, Article II = the President, Article III = the courts. Knowing which article a quote comes from helps you identify the branch fast.
Question 2 of 35 · Structure and design of the U.S. government
Drop-downTrade, Taxes and the President in the U.S. Constitution (1787)
The Constitution divides power over taxes and trade between Congress and the President. Read the four excerpts and the note that follows.
(1) Article I, Section 8: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;" …
(2) Article I, Section 8 (continued): "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
(3) Article I, Section 9: "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."
(4) Article II, Section 3: "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; … he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States."
Word help: duties and imposts = taxes on imported goods (also called tariffs); excises = taxes on goods made or sold at home; uniform = the same everywhere; expedient = useful or wise; "He" in Article II = the President.
Editor's note: Beginning with the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, Congress has passed laws that allow the President to negotiate trade agreements and, in certain situations, to raise or lower tariffs within limits that Congress sets. Congress can change or repeal these laws.
Use paragraph 4 to complete the sentences.
In the State of the Union message, the President new laws. The power to actually pass those laws belongs to . Once a law is passed, the President's duty is to .
Choose an answer from each menu.
Hint
Look for the verbs in paragraph 4: what does the President do "to their Consideration," and what must he "take Care" of?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 4 (Article II, Section 3) says the President shall "give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient" and "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Step by step:
The verb used for new measures is recommend. The President suggests laws; the President cannot pass them.
"Their Consideration" refers to Congress. Article I gives lawmaking power to Congress, so Congress decides whether to pass what the President recommends.
After a law exists, the President must "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" — in plain words, make sure the law is carried out.
Deciding whether a law is constitutional is the courts' job, not the President's duty in this clause.
Completed: the President recommends new laws; the power to pass them belongs to Congress; afterward the President must make sure the law is faithfully carried out.
Tip: The President is the nation's chief executive. Execute means carry out. Congress makes laws, the President carries them out, and the courts interpret them.
Question 3 of 35 · Principles of American constitutional democracy
Trade, Taxes and the President in the U.S. Constitution (1787)
The Constitution divides power over taxes and trade between Congress and the President. Read the four excerpts and the note that follows.
(1) Article I, Section 8: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;" …
(2) Article I, Section 8 (continued): "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
(3) Article I, Section 9: "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."
(4) Article II, Section 3: "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; … he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States."
Word help: duties and imposts = taxes on imported goods (also called tariffs); excises = taxes on goods made or sold at home; uniform = the same everywhere; expedient = useful or wise; "He" in Article II = the President.
Editor's note: Beginning with the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, Congress has passed laws that allow the President to negotiate trade agreements and, in certain situations, to raise or lower tariffs within limits that Congress sets. Congress can change or repeal these laws.
The editor's note describes laws that let the President raise or lower some tariffs. Which statement best explains how these laws fit with paragraph 1?
Hint
Who holds the tariff power under paragraph 1? Who wrote the laws described in the note, and who can change them?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 1 gives "The Congress" the power to lay "Duties" and "Imposts" (tariffs). The editor's note says Congress "passed laws" that let the President act on tariffs "within limits that Congress sets" and that "Congress can change or repeal these laws."
Step by step:
The original power belongs to Congress.
Congress, using that power, chose to give the President some authority by passing ordinary laws.
The President's authority has limits set by Congress, and Congress can take it back by changing the law. So the power still rests on Congress's authority.
Eliminate the others: the Constitution never gave tariff power to the President; a law is not an amendment and cannot permanently change the Constitution; paragraph 3 bans taxes only on exports, not on imports.
The correct answer is the tariff power belongs to Congress, which has chosen to share part of it with the President on terms that Congress sets and can change.
Tip: Watch for the difference between a law (passed by Congress, can be changed by Congress) and an amendment (changes the Constitution itself). Also read limiting words such as exported carefully.
Question 4 of 35 · Structure and design of the U.S. government
Hot spotPresidential Vetoes and Overrides
Under Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, the President can veto (reject) a bill passed by Congress by returning it with objections. Congress can then override the veto and make the bill a law anyway, but only if two-thirds of the House and two-thirds of the Senate vote to do so. The chart shows the regular vetoes of eight presidents who served between 1945 and 1989, and how many of those vetoes Congress overrode. Pocket vetoes, which happen when Congress has adjourned and the bill cannot be returned, are not shown, because Congress has no chance to override them.
Look at the chart. Click the president who issued the most regular vetoes.
Click on the figure to mark your answer (or focus it and use the arrow keys).
Hint
Compare only the blue bars. Find the tallest one and read the number above it.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the chart: The blue bars show regular vetoes: Truman 180, Eisenhower 73, Kennedy 12, Johnson 16, Nixon 26, Ford 48, Carter 13, Reagan 39.
Step by step:
The question asks about regular vetoes, so use the blue bars, not the red (overridden) bars.
The tallest blue bar is far above the others: Truman, 180.
The next highest, Eisenhower (73), is less than half of Truman's total.
Do not be distracted by the red bars: Truman and Ford each had 12 vetoes overridden, but the question is not about overrides.
The correct answer is Truman (1945–53).
Tip: In a chart with two series, check the legend first and make sure you are reading the series the question names.
Question 5 of 35 · Structure and design of the U.S. government
Fill inPresidential Vetoes and Overrides
Under Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, the President can veto (reject) a bill passed by Congress by returning it with objections. Congress can then override the veto and make the bill a law anyway, but only if two-thirds of the House and two-thirds of the Senate vote to do so. The chart shows the regular vetoes of eight presidents who served between 1945 and 1989, and how many of those vetoes Congress overrode. Pocket vetoes, which happen when Congress has adjourned and the bill cannot be returned, are not shown, because Congress has no chance to override them.
Based on the chart, what percent of President Ford's regular vetoes did Congress override?
%
Type your answer in the box. Fractions like 3/4 are fine.
Hint
Percent = part ÷ whole × 100. Here the part is the red bar and the whole is the blue bar for Ford.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the chart: Ford (1974–77) had 48 regular vetoes (blue bar) and 12 vetoes overridden (red bar).
Check: one-fourth of 48 is 12, so 25% makes sense.
Congress overrode 25% of Ford's regular vetoes.
Tip: Common mistakes are dividing the wrong way (48 \div 12 = 4) or reporting the raw number (12). Always ask: "What percent of what?" The "of" number is the whole and goes on the bottom.
Question 6 of 35 · Principles of American constitutional democracy
Presidential Vetoes and Overrides
Under Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, the President can veto (reject) a bill passed by Congress by returning it with objections. Congress can then override the veto and make the bill a law anyway, but only if two-thirds of the House and two-thirds of the Senate vote to do so. The chart shows the regular vetoes of eight presidents who served between 1945 and 1989, and how many of those vetoes Congress overrode. Pocket vetoes, which happen when Congress has adjourned and the bill cannot be returned, are not shown, because Congress has no chance to override them.
Which president had the largest share of his regular vetoes overridden by Congress?
Hint
A share is a percent. For each choice, divide the red number by the blue number.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the chart: Truman 12 of 180; Nixon 7 of 26; Ford 12 of 48; Reagan 9 of 39.
Step by step:
Truman: 12 \div 180 \approx 0.067, about 6.7%.
Nixon: 7 \div 26 \approx 0.269, about 26.9%.
Ford: 12 \div 48 = 0.25, or 25%.
Reagan: 9 \div 39 \approx 0.231, about 23.1%.
The largest share is Nixon's, about 27%, even though Nixon had fewer overrides (7) than Truman or Ford (12 each).
The correct answer is Nixon.
Tip:Most and largest share are different questions. The president with the most overrides is not necessarily the one with the largest percent overridden. When a question says share, rate or percent, divide.
Question 7 of 35 · Structure and design of the U.S. government
Executive Orders: Power With Limits
(1) An executive order is a written directive from the President to officials and agencies in the executive branch. It tells them how to carry out their work. The Constitution does not mention executive orders by name. Presidents base them on their powers under Article II, such as the duty to see that laws are carried out and the role of Commander in Chief, or on powers that Congress has given the President by law.
(2) Executive orders have been used for major decisions. In 1948, President Harry Truman issued Executive Order 9981, which called for equal treatment and opportunity for all people in the armed forces. It was an important step toward ending racial segregation in the U.S. military.
(3) Still, an executive order is not the same as a law passed by Congress, and its power has limits. Federal courts can rule that an order goes beyond what the President is allowed to do. In 1952, during the Korean War, Truman ordered the government to take control of the nation's steel mills to keep a strike from stopping production. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the Supreme Court ruled that neither the Constitution nor any law gave the President the power to seize private property in this way, and the mills were returned to their owners.
(4) Congress can respond as well. It can pass a law that overturns or blocks an order, although the President may veto that law. Congress can also refuse to provide the money needed to carry out an order. Finally, an executive order lasts only as long as presidents keep it: a later President can change or cancel (revoke) an earlier President's order simply by issuing a new one.
According to paragraph 1, an executive order is best described as
Hint
Reread the first sentence of paragraph 1. Who writes an executive order, and to whom?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 1: "An executive order is a written directive from the President to officials and agencies in the executive branch. It tells them how to carry out their work."
Step by step:
The author of an executive order is the President, not Congress or a court.
The audience is the executive branch: officials and agencies.
Its purpose is to direct how they carry out their work.
Paragraph 3 adds that an executive order "is not the same as a law passed by Congress," which rules out the law choice. It is also not an amendment or a court ruling.
The correct answer is a directive from the President telling executive branch officials how to carry out their work.
Tip: Definition questions are usually answered in the passage itself. Look for the sentence that uses "is" or "means" right after the bold term.
Question 8 of 35 · Principles of American constitutional democracy
Select allExecutive Orders: Power With Limits
(1) An executive order is a written directive from the President to officials and agencies in the executive branch. It tells them how to carry out their work. The Constitution does not mention executive orders by name. Presidents base them on their powers under Article II, such as the duty to see that laws are carried out and the role of Commander in Chief, or on powers that Congress has given the President by law.
(2) Executive orders have been used for major decisions. In 1948, President Harry Truman issued Executive Order 9981, which called for equal treatment and opportunity for all people in the armed forces. It was an important step toward ending racial segregation in the U.S. military.
(3) Still, an executive order is not the same as a law passed by Congress, and its power has limits. Federal courts can rule that an order goes beyond what the President is allowed to do. In 1952, during the Korean War, Truman ordered the government to take control of the nation's steel mills to keep a strike from stopping production. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the Supreme Court ruled that neither the Constitution nor any law gave the President the power to seize private property in this way, and the mills were returned to their owners.
(4) Congress can respond as well. It can pass a law that overturns or blocks an order, although the President may veto that law. Congress can also refuse to provide the money needed to carry out an order. Finally, an executive order lasts only as long as presidents keep it: a later President can change or cancel (revoke) an earlier President's order simply by issuing a new one.
Based on the passage, which actions could limit or end a President's executive order? Select all that apply.
Select all that apply.
Hint
Paragraphs 3 and 4 list the checks. Judge each choice against them one at a time.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 3: "Federal courts can rule that an order goes beyond what the President is allowed to do." Paragraph 4: Congress "can pass a law that overturns or blocks an order," "can also refuse to provide the money needed to carry out an order," and "a later President can change or cancel (revoke) an earlier President's order."
Step by step:
A federal court ruling the order goes beyond the President's power — named in paragraph 3 (the steel-mill case is an example). ✔
Congress passing a law that blocks the order — named in paragraph 4. ✔
Congress refusing to fund it — named in paragraph 4. ✔
A later President revoking it — named in paragraph 4. ✔
A governor canceling a federal order — not in the passage. A state official cannot cancel a federal executive order; federal law and lawful federal actions are supreme over state actions. ✘
The Senate alone voting to reject it — the passage gives the Senate no such special role. The Senate's approval role applies to treaties and appointments, not executive orders; blocking an order by law requires both houses. ✘
The correct answers are the court ruling, the blocking law, the refusal to fund and the later President's revocation.
Tip: In select-all questions, a choice can sound like a real check and still be wrong for this situation. Match each choice to a specific sentence in the text.
Question 9 of 35 · World War I and World War II
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Address to Congress, December 8, 1941
On December 8, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke to a joint session of Congress. The day before, Japanese forces had attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.
(1) "Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan."
(2) "The United States was at peace with that Nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific." …
(3) "As Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense." …
(4) "Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger." …
(5) "I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire."
Word help: infamy = lasting shame; solicitation = request; hostilities = acts of war; no blinking at = no ignoring; dastardly = cowardly and cruel.
Note: Congress voted to declare war on Japan later that same day. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power "To declare War."
What was Roosevelt's main purpose in this address?
Hint
Look at what Roosevelt directly asks Congress to do in the last paragraph of the excerpt.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 5: "I ask that the Congress declare that … a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire." Paragraph 1 describes the attack that led to this request.
Step by step:
Paragraphs 1–4 explain what happened: a surprise attack, while the two nations were still talking about peace, that put the country "in grave danger."
Paragraph 5 states the request that all of this builds toward: a declaration of war.
Paragraph 2 uses the past tense ("was still in conversation") to show peace talks had been going on before the attack, not that they would continue.
Roosevelt asks Congress to declare war; he does not claim to have declared it himself.
The correct answer is to ask Congress to declare war on Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Tip: To find the purpose of a speech, look for the sentence where the speaker asks the audience to do something. Everything else usually supports that request.
Question 10 of 35 · Structure and design of the U.S. government
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Address to Congress, December 8, 1941
On December 8, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke to a joint session of Congress. The day before, Japanese forces had attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.
(1) "Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan."
(2) "The United States was at peace with that Nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific." …
(3) "As Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense." …
(4) "Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger." …
(5) "I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire."
Word help: infamy = lasting shame; solicitation = request; hostilities = acts of war; no blinking at = no ignoring; dastardly = cowardly and cruel.
Note: Congress voted to declare war on Japan later that same day. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power "To declare War."
In paragraph 3, Roosevelt says he has already "directed that all measures be taken for our defense." Yet in paragraph 5 he still asks Congress for a declaration of war. Which explanation is best supported by the Constitution?
Hint
Read the note at the end of the excerpt. Which branch holds the power "To declare War"?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 3: "As Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense." The note: "Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power 'To declare War.'"
Step by step:
As Commander in Chief (Article II), the President leads the armed forces and can order them to defend the country right away.
But the power to formally declare war is listed in Article I, which describes the powers of Congress.
So Roosevelt could order defensive steps on his own, but he needed Congress to make the declaration. This division is an example of separation of powers and checks and balances.
The Supreme Court and the states have no role in declaring war, and nothing limits the Commander in Chief role to peacetime.
The correct answer is the President commands the military, but the Constitution gives the power to declare war to Congress.
Tip: Remember the pairing: Congress declares war and pays for the military; the President commands the military.
Question 11 of 35 · Structure and design of the U.S. government
Fill inThe War Powers Resolution (1973)
Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in November 1973, near the end of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. President Richard Nixon vetoed it, and Congress overrode his veto. The law was meant to give Congress a stronger voice when a President sends troops into combat without a declaration of war. The excerpts below are from the law as it appears in the U.S. Code.
(1) 50 U.S.C. 1541(c): "The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
(2) 50 U.S.C. 1543(a): "In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced— (1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances; … the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing," …
(3) 50 U.S.C. 1544(b): "Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 1543(a)(1) of this title, whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces."
Word help: hostilities = fighting; imminent = about to happen; pursuant to = following; specific statutory authorization = permission given in a law passed by Congress; section 1543(a)(1) = the 48-hour report rule in paragraph 2; terminate = end; certifies = formally states.
A President reports to Congress that U.S. forces have been sent into hostilities. Congress does not declare war, pass an authorization or extend the deadline. The President certifies in writing that unavoidable military necessity requires more time to remove the forces safely.
According to paragraph 3, what is the greatest total number of days after the report that the forces may remain?
days
Type your answer in the box. Fractions like 3/4 are fine.
Hint
Paragraph 3 sets a first deadline and then allows one extension. Add them.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 3: "Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted … the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces" unless Congress acts, and "Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity" requires it.
Step by step:
Congress took none of the three actions, so the basic limit applies: 60 days.
The President made the written certification, so the period can be extended by "not more than an additional thirty days": 30 days.
60 + 30 = 90 days.
The 48 hours in paragraph 2 is the deadline for the report, not an extra stay, so it is not added.
The greatest total is 90 days.
Tip: Legal texts often stack rules: a main rule, then exceptions and extensions. List each one and check which conditions in the scenario are met.
Question 12 of 35 · Principles of American constitutional democracy
The War Powers Resolution (1973)
Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in November 1973, near the end of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. President Richard Nixon vetoed it, and Congress overrode his veto. The law was meant to give Congress a stronger voice when a President sends troops into combat without a declaration of war. The excerpts below are from the law as it appears in the U.S. Code.
(1) 50 U.S.C. 1541(c): "The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
(2) 50 U.S.C. 1543(a): "In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced— (1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances; … the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing," …
(3) 50 U.S.C. 1544(b): "Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 1543(a)(1) of this title, whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces."
Word help: hostilities = fighting; imminent = about to happen; pursuant to = following; specific statutory authorization = permission given in a law passed by Congress; section 1543(a)(1) = the 48-hour report rule in paragraph 2; terminate = end; certifies = formally states.
A President sends U.S. forces into fighting overseas. There has been no declaration of war, no specific authorization in a law, and no attack on the United States, its territories or its armed forces. Which statement is best supported by the excerpts?
Hint
Check the scenario against the three situations in paragraph 1, then apply the deadlines in paragraphs 2 and 3.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 1 says the President's power to send forces into hostilities is exercised "only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack." Paragraph 2 requires a report "within 48 hours." Paragraph 3 requires the President to "terminate" the use of forces within sixty days unless Congress acts (plus up to thirty more days with a certification).
Step by step:
The scenario meets none of the three situations listed in paragraph 1.
Paragraph 2 still applies: a written report is due within 48 hours, not after 60 days.
Paragraph 3 then limits the operation to 60 days (90 with certification) unless Congress authorizes it.
The law gives no role to the Supreme Court, and it does not let the Commander in Chief continue indefinitely.
The correct answer is the action falls outside the three situations in paragraph 1, and paragraph 3 would require it to end within 60 days (or 90 with certification) unless Congress authorizes it.
Tip: This law is a check by the legislative branch on the executive branch's military power. On scenario questions, test every condition in the scenario against every rule in the text.
Question 13 of 35 · Political parties, campaigns and elections
Drag and dropThe Road to the White House
(1) Choosing a President takes more than a year. The process begins when candidates announce that they are running and start raising money and campaigning. Most candidates run as members of a political party.
(2) Next come the primary elections and caucuses, held state by state, usually from January through June of the election year. In a primary, voters cast ballots for the candidate they want their party to nominate. In a caucus, party members meet in person to discuss the candidates and choose. The results decide how many delegates each candidate wins.
(3) In the summer, each major party holds a national convention. The delegates formally nominate the party's candidate for President, and the candidate's choice for Vice President is confirmed. The party also adopts a platform, a statement of its goals and positions.
(4) The general election is held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. On that day, voters are not directly electing the President. In each state, they are choosing a group of electors pledged to a candidate. Each state has as many electors as it has members of Congress (senators plus representatives), and the District of Columbia has three. There are 538 electors in all. In 48 states and the District of Columbia, the candidate who wins the most popular votes in the state wins all of that state's electors. Maine and Nebraska divide some of their electors by congressional district.
(5) In December, the electors meet in their states and cast their votes. Congress counts the votes in January. A candidate needs a majority, at least 270 of the 538 electoral votes, to win. If no candidate reaches 270, the House of Representatives chooses the President, with each state's delegation casting one vote. The new President takes the oath of office on January 20.
(6) Because most states give all of their electors to the statewide winner, a candidate can win the most popular votes nationwide and still lose in the Electoral College. This has happened in several elections, including 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016.
Drag each step of a presidential election into the correct order, from first to last.
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
Tap a tile, then tap a box to place it.
Hint
Look for time words in paragraphs 2–5: January through June, summer, November, December.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 2: primaries and caucuses are held "usually from January through June." Paragraph 3: "In the summer, each major party holds a national convention." Paragraph 4: the general election is "the Tuesday after the first Monday in November." Paragraph 5: "In December, the electors meet in their states and cast their votes."
Step by step:
Primaries and caucuses (January–June) decide how many delegates each candidate wins.
Those delegates go to the national convention (summer), where the party nominates its candidate.
The nominees face each other in the general election (November), where voters choose electors.
The electors cast their votes (December), and Congress counts them in January.
Correct order: primaries and caucuses → national conventions → general election → electors vote.
Tip: On sequence questions, circle every date or time word in the text, then line the events up. Each step usually depends on the one before it.
Question 14 of 35 · Political parties, campaigns and elections
The Road to the White House
(1) Choosing a President takes more than a year. The process begins when candidates announce that they are running and start raising money and campaigning. Most candidates run as members of a political party.
(2) Next come the primary elections and caucuses, held state by state, usually from January through June of the election year. In a primary, voters cast ballots for the candidate they want their party to nominate. In a caucus, party members meet in person to discuss the candidates and choose. The results decide how many delegates each candidate wins.
(3) In the summer, each major party holds a national convention. The delegates formally nominate the party's candidate for President, and the candidate's choice for Vice President is confirmed. The party also adopts a platform, a statement of its goals and positions.
(4) The general election is held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. On that day, voters are not directly electing the President. In each state, they are choosing a group of electors pledged to a candidate. Each state has as many electors as it has members of Congress (senators plus representatives), and the District of Columbia has three. There are 538 electors in all. In 48 states and the District of Columbia, the candidate who wins the most popular votes in the state wins all of that state's electors. Maine and Nebraska divide some of their electors by congressional district.
(5) In December, the electors meet in their states and cast their votes. Congress counts the votes in January. A candidate needs a majority, at least 270 of the 538 electoral votes, to win. If no candidate reaches 270, the House of Representatives chooses the President, with each state's delegation casting one vote. The new President takes the oath of office on January 20.
(6) Because most states give all of their electors to the statewide winner, a candidate can win the most popular votes nationwide and still lose in the Electoral College. This has happened in several elections, including 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016.
According to paragraphs 4 and 6, which situation could allow a candidate to become President without winning the most popular votes nationwide?
Hint
In most states, does winning a state by a little give a candidate fewer electors than winning it by a lot?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 4: "the candidate who wins the most popular votes in the state wins all of that state's electors." Paragraph 6: "a candidate can win the most popular votes nationwide and still lose in the Electoral College."
Step by step:
Because of winner-take-all, a candidate who wins a state by just a few votes gets all of its electors. Extra votes beyond a win add no electors.
So a candidate could win several states with many electors by narrow margins, while the opponent piles up huge margins in other states.
The opponent may then have more total popular votes, but fewer electoral votes. The first candidate reaches 270 and wins.
Delegates, primary votes and convention results only decide the nomination, not the presidency.
The correct answer is winning many states with large numbers of electors by narrow margins, while losing other states by wide margins.
Tip: Separate the two contests: the nomination (primaries, delegates, convention) and the general election (popular votes in each state → electors → 270).
Question 15 of 35 · Political parties, campaigns and elections
The Road to the White House
(1) Choosing a President takes more than a year. The process begins when candidates announce that they are running and start raising money and campaigning. Most candidates run as members of a political party.
(2) Next come the primary elections and caucuses, held state by state, usually from January through June of the election year. In a primary, voters cast ballots for the candidate they want their party to nominate. In a caucus, party members meet in person to discuss the candidates and choose. The results decide how many delegates each candidate wins.
(3) In the summer, each major party holds a national convention. The delegates formally nominate the party's candidate for President, and the candidate's choice for Vice President is confirmed. The party also adopts a platform, a statement of its goals and positions.
(4) The general election is held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. On that day, voters are not directly electing the President. In each state, they are choosing a group of electors pledged to a candidate. Each state has as many electors as it has members of Congress (senators plus representatives), and the District of Columbia has three. There are 538 electors in all. In 48 states and the District of Columbia, the candidate who wins the most popular votes in the state wins all of that state's electors. Maine and Nebraska divide some of their electors by congressional district.
(5) In December, the electors meet in their states and cast their votes. Congress counts the votes in January. A candidate needs a majority, at least 270 of the 538 electoral votes, to win. If no candidate reaches 270, the House of Representatives chooses the President, with each state's delegation casting one vote. The new President takes the oath of office on January 20.
(6) Because most states give all of their electors to the statewide winner, a candidate can win the most popular votes nationwide and still lose in the Electoral College. This has happened in several elections, including 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016.
In a hypothetical election, three candidates win electoral votes: Candidate X wins 260, Candidate Y wins 250 and Candidate Z wins 28. Based on the passage, what happens next?
Hint
Add the votes to check the total, then compare the leader's number with the majority needed in paragraph 5.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 5: "A candidate needs a majority, at least 270 of the 538 electoral votes, to win. If no candidate reaches 270, the House of Representatives chooses the President, with each state's delegation casting one vote."
Step by step:
Check the total: 260 + 250 + 28 = 538, all the electoral votes.
The leader, Candidate X, has 260, which is less than 270. Having the most votes (a plurality) is not enough; a majority is required.
Since no one reached 270, the decision goes to the House of Representatives.
In the House, each state delegation casts one vote, so a small state counts as much as a large one in this step.
The correct answer is the House of Representatives chooses the President, with each state delegation casting one vote.
Tip:Majority means more than half. Plurality means the most, even if less than half. GED questions often test this difference.
Question 16 of 35 · Types of modern and historical governments
Two Executives, Two Systems
Kordania and Lessaro are fictional countries.
(1) In Kordania, General Varo took power after the army removed the elected government. He suspended the constitution, closed the national legislature and banned every political party except his own. Newspapers must send their stories to government censors before printing. Varo rules by decree: his orders take effect immediately and cannot be challenged in court. He has not set a date for elections.
(2) In Lessaro, the president is elected by the people to a five-year term and may serve no more than two terms. A written constitution lists the rights of citizens, including freedom of the press. The president can propose laws and veto bills, but the elected legislature can override a veto with a two-thirds vote. Independent judges have struck down presidential orders that violated the constitution. Several political parties compete in regular elections.
Which type of government does Kordania have?
Hint
Who holds power in Kordania, how did he get it, and can anyone limit it?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 1: General Varo "took power after the army removed the elected government," "suspended the constitution, closed the national legislature and banned every political party except his own," and "rules by decree" with orders that "cannot be challenged in court."
Step by step:
Power was taken by the military, not won in an election.
One person holds unlimited power: no constitution, no legislature, no courts to check him, no free press, no opposition parties.
A government in which a single ruler holds unchecked power is a dictatorship; because the ruler came to power through the army, it is a military dictatorship.
It is not a monarchy (power is not inherited) and not any kind of democracy (no elections, no legislature).
The correct answer is a military dictatorship.
Tip: To classify a government, ask three questions: Who rules? How did they get power? What limits their power?
Question 17 of 35 · Types of modern and historical governments
Two Executives, Two Systems
Kordania and Lessaro are fictional countries.
(1) In Kordania, General Varo took power after the army removed the elected government. He suspended the constitution, closed the national legislature and banned every political party except his own. Newspapers must send their stories to government censors before printing. Varo rules by decree: his orders take effect immediately and cannot be challenged in court. He has not set a date for elections.
(2) In Lessaro, the president is elected by the people to a five-year term and may serve no more than two terms. A written constitution lists the rights of citizens, including freedom of the press. The president can propose laws and veto bills, but the elected legislature can override a veto with a two-thirds vote. Independent judges have struck down presidential orders that violated the constitution. Several political parties compete in regular elections.
Which choice correctly matches a feature of Lessaro's government with the constitutional principle it shows?
Hint
Test each pair: does the feature really illustrate that principle? Recall what federalism, popular sovereignty and separation of powers mean.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 2: "Independent judges have struck down presidential orders that violated the constitution."
Step by step:
Courts striking down government actions that violate a constitution is called judicial review. This pair is correct.
A two-term limit restricts how long one leader can hold office. It is a limit on power (limited government), not federalism, which is the division of power between national and state or regional governments.
A legislature overriding a veto is an example of checks and balances. Popular sovereignty means power comes from the people, as in elections.
Competing political parties show political pluralism and free elections, not separation of powers, which is the division of government into branches.
The correct answer is judges striking down presidential orders — judicial review.
Tip: On matching questions, both halves must be right. Many wrong choices pair a real feature from the passage with the wrong principle.
Question 18 of 35 · Contemporary public policy
A Proposed Tariff on Imported Steel: Two Views
Congress is debating a proposed 25 percent tariff on imported steel. Two fictional writers share their views.
Viewpoint 1 — Dana Whitfield, a fictional spokesperson for a steelworkers' group
(1) Over the past ten years, imports of low-priced foreign steel have grown, and three mills in our region have closed. A 25 percent tariff on imported steel would give American mills a fair chance to compete. When mills stay open, so do the diners, hardware stores and schools that depend on mill paychecks.
(2) Steel is also a matter of national security. A country that cannot make its own steel must rely on others to build its ships, bridges and power lines. In my view, no price is too high to keep that ability at home.
Viewpoint 2 — Marcus Lee, a fictional owner of a company that builds farm equipment
(3) My company buys about 4,000 tons of steel each year. A 25 percent tariff would raise the price of imported steel, and American mills would likely raise their prices too, since they would face less competition. That would add to the cost of every tractor we build.
(4) Higher steel prices would hurt the many industries that use steel, such as car makers, appliance makers and builders. Other countries could also respond with tariffs of their own on American farm products, which would hurt my customers. The best way to protect jobs is to keep costs low and markets open.
On which point would both writers most likely agree?
Hint
Find something that Viewpoint 1 assumes and Viewpoint 2 states directly. Eliminate ideas only one writer supports.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Viewpoint 1 says the tariff "would give American mills a fair chance to compete" against "low-priced foreign steel" (paragraph 1). Viewpoint 2 says "A 25 percent tariff would raise the price of imported steel" (paragraph 3).
Step by step:
Whitfield's argument only works if the tariff makes foreign steel more expensive: that is how it helps American mills compete with low-priced imports.
Lee states this effect directly. So both writers accept that the tariff raises the price of imported steel; they disagree about whether that is good.
Whether the tariff saves more jobs than it costs is exactly what they argue about.
Only Lee raises the risk of other countries' tariffs, and only Whitfield makes the national-security argument.
The correct answer is a tariff would make imported steel more expensive for American buyers.
Tip: On "both would agree" questions, look for a shared fact or assumption underneath two opposite conclusions.
Question 19 of 35 · Contemporary public policy
A Proposed Tariff on Imported Steel: Two Views
Congress is debating a proposed 25 percent tariff on imported steel. Two fictional writers share their views.
Viewpoint 1 — Dana Whitfield, a fictional spokesperson for a steelworkers' group
(1) Over the past ten years, imports of low-priced foreign steel have grown, and three mills in our region have closed. A 25 percent tariff on imported steel would give American mills a fair chance to compete. When mills stay open, so do the diners, hardware stores and schools that depend on mill paychecks.
(2) Steel is also a matter of national security. A country that cannot make its own steel must rely on others to build its ships, bridges and power lines. In my view, no price is too high to keep that ability at home.
Viewpoint 2 — Marcus Lee, a fictional owner of a company that builds farm equipment
(3) My company buys about 4,000 tons of steel each year. A 25 percent tariff would raise the price of imported steel, and American mills would likely raise their prices too, since they would face less competition. That would add to the cost of every tractor we build.
(4) Higher steel prices would hurt the many industries that use steel, such as car makers, appliance makers and builders. Other countries could also respond with tariffs of their own on American farm products, which would hurt my customers. The best way to protect jobs is to keep costs low and markets open.
Which statement from the passage is an opinion rather than a fact?
Hint
A fact can be checked with records or measurements. An opinion is a judgment that people could reasonably disagree with. Watch for signal words.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 2: "In my view, no price is too high to keep that ability at home."
Step by step:
"In my view" is a signal phrase for a personal judgment.
"No price is too high" cannot be proved or disproved with evidence; it expresses a value. That makes it an opinion.
The other statements can be checked: import records can show whether steel imports grew; news and business records can confirm that three mills closed; a company's purchase records can confirm it bought about 4,000 tons of steel.
A checkable statement is a fact claim even if you have not checked it yet.
The correct answer is "In my view, no price is too high to keep that ability at home."
Tip: Signal words for opinions include in my view, I believe, best, worst, should, too high. Numbers, dates and events usually signal facts.
Question 20 of 35 · World War I and World War II
Hot spotThe United States and the Two World Wars
The timeline shows key events involving the United States from the start of World War I to the end of World War II. Events are in order but are not spaced to scale.
Click the event on the timeline that directly brought the United States into World War II as a combatant.
Click on the figure to mark your answer (or focus it and use the arrow keys).
Hint
Look at the green (World War II era) events. Which one includes the United States declaring war?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the timeline: "December 1941: Japan attacks Pearl Harbor; U.S. declares war on Japan."
Step by step:
World War II began in Europe in September 1939, but the timeline does not show the United States joining the fighting then.
In March 1941, the Lend-Lease Act let the U.S. lend weapons and supplies to the Allies. That was aid, not a declaration of war.
The first green event that includes the U.S. declaring war is December 1941, right after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
D-Day (June 1944) came after the U.S. was already fighting.
The correct answer is December 1941: Japan attacks Pearl Harbor; U.S. declares war on Japan.
Tip: "Directly" means the immediate cause. Earlier events may have moved the country closer to war, but the question wants the event that actually brought it in.
Question 21 of 35 · World War I and World War II
The United States and the Two World Wars
The timeline shows key events involving the United States from the start of World War I to the end of World War II. Events are in order but are not spaced to scale.
Which conclusion is best supported by the timeline?
Hint
Check each choice against the dates. Pay attention to which events come before and after December 1941.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the timeline: "March 1941: Lend-Lease Act: U.S. lends weapons, supplies to Allies" comes before "December 1941: Japan attacks Pearl Harbor; U.S. declares war on Japan." Also: "September 1939: World War II begins in Europe"; "1935: Congress passes first Neutrality Act"; "1914: World War I begins in Europe"; "April 1917: U.S. declares war on Germany."
Step by step:
Lend-Lease (March 1941) came about nine months before the U.S. declared war (December 1941). So the U.S. was helping the Allies before it formally entered the war. ✔
World War II began in Europe in 1939, but the U.S. declared war in 1941, so it did not enter right away. ✘
The first Neutrality Act came in 1935, years before Pearl Harbor. ✘
World War I began in 1914, and the U.S. declared war in 1917, so it did not join in the same year. ✘
The correct answer is the United States gave aid to the Allies before it formally entered World War II.
Tip: For timeline conclusions, translate each choice into a "before/after" claim and check the order of the two events.
Question 22 of 35 · World War I and World War II
Select allThe Home Front in World War II
(1) After the United States entered World War II in December 1941, the war changed daily life for nearly every American. More than 16 million Americans served in the armed forces during the war. Factories that had made cars switched to making tanks, airplanes and trucks. No new cars were built for ordinary buyers from 1942 until the war ended.
(2) With so many men in uniform, employers hired workers they had often turned away before. Millions of women took jobs in factories and shipyards, and "Rosie the Riveter" became a symbol of these workers. Hundreds of thousands of Black Americans moved from the rural South to cities in the North and West to take jobs in defense plants, continuing the movement known as the Great Migration. In 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt had issued Executive Order 8802, which banned discrimination based on race, creed, color or national origin in the defense industry and in government.
(3) The government also asked civilians to sacrifice. To make sure the armed forces had enough supplies, the Office of Price Administration rationed goods such as sugar, coffee, meat, gasoline and tires. Families used ration books with stamps to buy them. Americans bought war bonds, lending money to the government to pay for the war, and planted "victory gardens" to grow their own vegetables. Communities collected scrap metal, rubber and paper to be turned into war materials.
(4) The war also brought injustice at home. Under Executive Order 9066, signed in February 1942, about 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry, most of them U.S. citizens, were forced from their homes on the West Coast and held in camps. In 1988, Congress passed a law that apologized and paid $20,000 to each surviving person who had been held.
According to the passage, which were ways that civilians on the home front supported the war effort? Select all that apply.
Select all that apply.
Hint
Paragraph 3 describes what civilians were asked to do. Check each choice against it, and watch for choices that twist facts from other paragraphs.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 3: "Americans bought war bonds, lending money to the government to pay for the war, and planted 'victory gardens' to grow their own vegetables. Communities collected scrap metal, rubber and paper to be turned into war materials."
Step by step:
Buying war bonds — named in paragraph 3. ✔
Planting victory gardens — named in paragraph 3. ✔
Collecting scrap metal, rubber and paper — named in paragraph 3. ✔
Buying new cars — paragraph 1 says "No new cars were built for ordinary buyers from 1942 until the war ended," so this could not happen. ✘
Paying $20,000 to the government — paragraph 4 says Congress paid $20,000 to surviving Japanese Americans in 1988, decades after the war. ✘
The correct answers are war bonds, victory gardens and scrap collection.
Tip: Distractors often reuse a real number or detail from the passage but attach it to the wrong person, time or direction. Reread the exact sentence before you select.
Question 23 of 35 · World War I and World War II
The Home Front in World War II
(1) After the United States entered World War II in December 1941, the war changed daily life for nearly every American. More than 16 million Americans served in the armed forces during the war. Factories that had made cars switched to making tanks, airplanes and trucks. No new cars were built for ordinary buyers from 1942 until the war ended.
(2) With so many men in uniform, employers hired workers they had often turned away before. Millions of women took jobs in factories and shipyards, and "Rosie the Riveter" became a symbol of these workers. Hundreds of thousands of Black Americans moved from the rural South to cities in the North and West to take jobs in defense plants, continuing the movement known as the Great Migration. In 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt had issued Executive Order 8802, which banned discrimination based on race, creed, color or national origin in the defense industry and in government.
(3) The government also asked civilians to sacrifice. To make sure the armed forces had enough supplies, the Office of Price Administration rationed goods such as sugar, coffee, meat, gasoline and tires. Families used ration books with stamps to buy them. Americans bought war bonds, lending money to the government to pay for the war, and planted "victory gardens" to grow their own vegetables. Communities collected scrap metal, rubber and paper to be turned into war materials.
(4) The war also brought injustice at home. Under Executive Order 9066, signed in February 1942, about 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry, most of them U.S. citizens, were forced from their homes on the West Coast and held in camps. In 1988, Congress passed a law that apologized and paid $20,000 to each surviving person who had been held.
Based on paragraph 2, what was one effect of the wartime need for workers?
Hint
Paragraph 2 begins with a cause: "With so many men in uniform." What happened as a result?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 2: "With so many men in uniform, employers hired workers they had often turned away before. Millions of women took jobs in factories and shipyards … Hundreds of thousands of Black Americans moved from the rural South to cities in the North and West to take jobs in defense plants."
Step by step:
Cause: millions of men left their jobs to serve in the military, so factories needed workers.
Effect: employers hired people they had often turned away before, especially women and Black Americans.
The passage says Black Americans moved to northern and western cities, which rules out the choice saying fewer people moved there.
Factories increased war production (paragraph 1), and rationing was part of the war effort (paragraph 3), so those choices contradict the passage.
The correct answer is women and Black Americans gained new job opportunities in defense industries.
Tip: Cause-and-effect questions often use signal words such as with, because, so, as a result. Find the cause in the text, then read the sentences right after it.
Question 24 of 35 · Economic causes and impacts of wars
Drop-downUnemployment and World War II
The unemployment rate is the percent of people in the civilian labor force (people who have a job or are looking for one) who do not have a job. During the Great Depression of the 1930s, millions of Americans were out of work. As World War II approached, and especially after the United States entered the war in December 1941, the federal government spent huge sums on ships, planes, tanks and other supplies, and millions of workers left the civilian labor force to serve in the armed forces.
Use the graph to complete the sentence.
From 1940 to 1944, the unemployment rate by percentage points.
Choose an answer from each menu.
Hint
Find the points for 1940 and 1944. Is the second one higher or lower? Then subtract the smaller number from the larger.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the graph: 1940 = 14.6%. 1944 = 1.2%.
Step by step:
1.2% is lower than 14.6%, so the rate fell.
Difference: 14.6 - 1.2 = 13.4 percentage points.
Do not add the two values (14.6 + 1.2 = 15.8), and do not report a single year's value (1.2) as the change. Using 1939 instead of 1940 would give 17.2 - 1.2 = 16.0, which answers a different question.
The completed sentence: From 1940 to 1944, the unemployment rate fell by 13.4 percentage points.
Tip: When both numbers are already percents, the gap between them is measured in percentage points. Just subtract.
Question 25 of 35 · Economic causes and impacts of wars
Unemployment and World War II
The unemployment rate is the percent of people in the civilian labor force (people who have a job or are looking for one) who do not have a job. During the Great Depression of the 1930s, millions of Americans were out of work. As World War II approached, and especially after the United States entered the war in December 1941, the federal government spent huge sums on ships, planes, tanks and other supplies, and millions of workers left the civilian labor force to serve in the armed forces.
Which conclusion is best supported by the graph and the introduction?
Hint
Check each choice against both the numbers on the graph and the information in the introduction.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: The graph shows unemployment falling from 17.2% (1939) to 4.7% (1942) and 1.2% (1944). The introduction says the government "spent huge sums on ships, planes, tanks and other supplies, and millions of workers left the civilian labor force to serve in the armed forces."
Step by step:
The steep drop in unemployment happened as war spending and military service grew, which supports the idea that the war effort helped end the high unemployment of the Depression. ✔
Unemployment did not rise each war year: it fell from 1942 to 1944, and the small rise to 1.9% came in 1945, when the war was ending. ✘
After the war, unemployment rose only to 3.9% in 1946, far below the 17.2% of 1939, so it did not return to Depression levels. ✘
In 1941, the year the U.S. entered the war in December, unemployment was 9.9%, not below 5%. ✘
The correct answer is war spending and military service helped bring an end to the high unemployment of the Great Depression.
Tip: For "best supported" questions, a correct answer must agree with every relevant number. One contradicting data point is enough to eliminate a choice.
Question 26 of 35 · Microeconomics
Fill inDalmora's Proposed Tariffs
Dalmora is a fictional country that is considering new tariffs (taxes on imported goods). The table shows the current price of three products, both imported and made in Dalmora, and the proposed tariff rate on each imported product. Assume importers pass the full tariff on to buyers. So the new price of an imported product equals its price before the tariff plus the tariff rate times that price.
If the proposed tariff takes effect, what will be the new price of an imported bicycle in Dalmora?
$
Type your answer in the box. Fractions like 3/4 are fine.
Hint
Find the bicycle's imported price and tariff rate. Multiply to find the tariff, then add it to the original price.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the table: Bicycle: imported price before tariff $240; proposed tariff 25%.
Step by step:
Change the percent to a decimal: 25% = 0.25.
Tariff amount: 0.25 \times 240 = 60 dollars.
New price: 240 + 60 = 300 dollars.
Shortcut: 240 \times 1.25 = 300.
Compare: the Dalmora-made bicycle costs $280, so after the tariff the imported bicycle would cost $20 more than the domestic one.
The new price is $300.
Tip: Common mistakes are reporting only the tariff ($60), or applying the tariff to the Dalmora-made price instead of the imported price (280 \times 1.25 = 350). Tariffs apply only to imports.
Question 27 of 35 · Microeconomics
Dalmora's Proposed Tariffs
Dalmora is a fictional country that is considering new tariffs (taxes on imported goods). The table shows the current price of three products, both imported and made in Dalmora, and the proposed tariff rate on each imported product. Assume importers pass the full tariff on to buyers. So the new price of an imported product equals its price before the tariff plus the tariff rate times that price.
If all three proposed tariffs take effect, for which product would the imported version still cost less than the Dalmora-made version?
Hint
Find the new imported price of each product, then compare it with the Dalmora-made price in the same row.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the table: Bicycle: $240, $280, 25%. Washing machine: $500, $560, 20%. Steel (1 ton): $600, $680, 10%.
Step by step:
Bicycle: 240 \times 1.25 = 300. Since 300 > 280, the import would cost more.
Washing machine: 500 \times 1.20 = 600. Since 600 > 560, the import would cost more.
Steel: 600 \times 1.10 = 660. Since 660 < 680, the import would still cost less.
So only steel stays cheaper as an import, because its tariff (10%) is small compared with the price gap.
The correct answer is steel.
Tip: A tariff makes imports more expensive, but it changes buying choices only if it is large enough to close the price gap. Always do the arithmetic for each row instead of guessing.
Question 28 of 35 · Key economic events in U.S. history
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff and Its Aftermath
(1) In June 1930, during the early months of the Great Depression, President Herbert Hoover signed the Tariff Act of 1930, often called the Smoot-Hawley Tariff after its two main sponsors in Congress. The law raised tariffs on thousands of imported products. Supporters hoped it would protect American farmers and factory workers from foreign competition at a time when prices and jobs were falling.
(2) Many economists warned against the law, and more than a thousand of them signed a public letter urging Hoover not to sign it. After it passed, a number of trading partners, including Canada, answered by raising their own tariffs on American goods. World trade, already shrinking because of the Depression, fell sharply over the next few years, and American exports dropped along with it. Most historians do not believe the tariff caused the Depression, but many argue that it made the downturn worse.
(3) Congress changed course in 1934. The Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act gave the President authority to negotiate agreements with individual countries to lower tariffs on both sides, within limits set by Congress. After World War II, the United States and other nations signed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947, which lowered tariffs among many countries at once.
According to paragraph 2, what was one effect of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff?
Hint
Paragraph 2 says what happened "after it passed." Read carefully what it says about the Depression itself.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 2: "After it passed, a number of trading partners, including Canada, answered by raising their own tariffs on American goods. World trade … fell sharply over the next few years, and American exports dropped along with it."
Step by step:
The effect described right after the law passed is retaliation: other countries raised tariffs on American goods.
With foreign tariffs higher, American products became more expensive abroad, and U.S. exports fell.
The passage says "Most historians do not believe the tariff caused the Depression," so the choice saying it caused the Depression goes too far. The Depression had already begun (paragraph 1: "during the early months of the Great Depression").
Nothing says it ended the Depression, and higher tariffs raise, not lower, the price of imports.
The correct answer is other countries raised tariffs on American goods, and U.S. exports fell.
Tip: Watch for answer choices that overstate the passage. "Made worse" is not the same as "caused."
Question 29 of 35 · Fundamental economic concepts
Comparative Advantage: Arlo and Brin
Arlo and Brin are fictional countries. Each can produce wheat and machines. The table shows how much one worker can produce in one day if that worker makes only one of the two products.
A country has an absolute advantage in a product if it can make more of it with the same resources. A country has a comparative advantage in a product if it gives up less of the other product to make it (it has a lower opportunity cost). Economists predict that trade benefits both countries when each specializes in the product in which it has a comparative advantage.
Based on the table and the definitions, which plan would allow both countries to benefit from trade?
Hint
For each country, find what one machine costs in tons of wheat given up. The country that gives up less wheat per machine should make machines.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the table: One Arlo worker makes 12 tons of wheat or 6 machines per day. One Brin worker makes 4 tons of wheat or 4 machines per day.
Step by step:
Absolute advantage: Arlo makes more of both products (12 > 4 and 6 > 4). But the definitions say trade decisions depend on comparative advantage.
Opportunity cost of 1 machine: Arlo gives up 12 \div 6 = 2 tons of wheat. Brin gives up 4 \div 4 = 1 ton. Brin gives up less, so Brin has the comparative advantage in machines.
Opportunity cost of 1 ton of wheat: Arlo gives up 6 \div 12 = 0.5 machine. Brin gives up 4 \div 4 = 1 machine. Arlo gives up less, so Arlo has the comparative advantage in wheat.
So Arlo should specialize in wheat, Brin in machines, and they should trade.
The correct answer is Arlo specializes in wheat and Brin specializes in machines, and they trade.
Tip: A country can be better at everything (absolute advantage) and still gain from trade. Always compare opportunity costs, not raw output.
Question 30 of 35 · Key historical documents
The Homestead Act (1862)
President Abraham Lincoln signed the Homestead Act on May 20, 1862, during the Civil War. Its full title was "An Act to secure Homesteads to actual Settlers on the Public Domain." A quarter section of land was 160 acres.
(1) "That any person who is the head of a family, or who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and is a citizen of the United States, or who shall have filed his declaration of intention to become such, as required by the naturalization laws of the United States, and who has never borne arms against the United States Government or given aid and comfort to its enemies, shall, from and after the first January, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, be entitled to enter one quarter section or a less quantity of unappropriated public lands," …
(2) … "that he, she, or they have resided upon or cultivated the same for the term of five years immediately succeeding the time of filing the affidavit aforesaid" …
Word help: declaration of intention = official papers saying a person plans to become a citizen; borne arms = fought; enter = claim; unappropriated public lands = land owned by the federal government that no one else had claimed; resided upon = lived on; cultivated = farmed.
Editor's note: Over the next several decades, settlers claimed millions of acres under the act, much of it on the Great Plains, where land was dry and had few trees. These lands had long been home to Native American nations, many of whom were forced onto reservations as settlement spread.
Based on paragraph 1, which of the following people could file a claim under the Homestead Act?
Hint
List the requirements in paragraph 1: age or head of family; citizenship or declaration of intention; never fought against the United States. Test each person.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 1 allows "any person who is the head of a family, or who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and is a citizen of the United States, or who shall have filed his declaration of intention to become such … and who has never borne arms against the United States Government" to claim "one quarter section or a less quantity" of public land.
Step by step:
22-year-old immigrant who filed a declaration of intention: over 21 ✔; not a citizen yet, but filing the declaration counts ✔; never fought against the U.S. ✔. Eligible.
19-year-old citizen, not head of a family: under 21 and not a head of family ✘.
Former Confederate soldier: "has never borne arms against the United States Government" ✘.
Railroad company wanting 10,000 acres: the act speaks of a "person" claiming one quarter section (160 acres) or less ✘.
The correct answer is a 22-year-old immigrant who has filed papers declaring the intention to become a citizen.
Tip: Legal texts often join requirements with and (all needed) and or (any one is enough). Mark each and and or before testing the choices.
Question 31 of 35 · Human migration
The Homestead Act (1862)
President Abraham Lincoln signed the Homestead Act on May 20, 1862, during the Civil War. Its full title was "An Act to secure Homesteads to actual Settlers on the Public Domain." A quarter section of land was 160 acres.
(1) "That any person who is the head of a family, or who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and is a citizen of the United States, or who shall have filed his declaration of intention to become such, as required by the naturalization laws of the United States, and who has never borne arms against the United States Government or given aid and comfort to its enemies, shall, from and after the first January, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, be entitled to enter one quarter section or a less quantity of unappropriated public lands," …
(2) … "that he, she, or they have resided upon or cultivated the same for the term of five years immediately succeeding the time of filing the affidavit aforesaid" …
Word help: declaration of intention = official papers saying a person plans to become a citizen; borne arms = fought; enter = claim; unappropriated public lands = land owned by the federal government that no one else had claimed; resided upon = lived on; cultivated = farmed.
Editor's note: Over the next several decades, settlers claimed millions of acres under the act, much of it on the Great Plains, where land was dry and had few trees. These lands had long been home to Native American nations, many of whom were forced onto reservations as settlement spread.
How did the Homestead Act most likely affect settlement patterns in the United States?
Hint
What did a settler have to do to keep the land (paragraph 2)? Where was most of the public land (editor's note)?
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 1 offers "one quarter section" (160 acres) of "unappropriated public lands." Paragraph 2 requires that the claimant has "resided upon or cultivated the same for the term of five years." The editor's note says settlers claimed millions of acres, "much of it on the Great Plains."
Step by step:
Free land was a strong pull factor drawing people to places where public land was available, mostly in the West and on the Great Plains.
Because claimants had to live on or farm the land for five years, the act encouraged permanent family farms rather than short visits.
The act let immigrants who had filed a declaration of intention claim land, so it did not stop immigration.
It moved people toward rural farmland, not toward eastern cities, and it gave land rather than paying people to leave.
The correct answer is it encouraged people to move west and settle on farms, since claimants had to live on or farm the land for five years.
Tip: A government policy that offers land, jobs or money in a place acts as a pull factor in migration.
Question 32 of 35 · Environment and societal development
Hot spotTeller Basin: Choosing a Town Site
The schematic map shows the fictional Teller Basin in the mid-1800s, before most towns were built. Four possible town sites are marked A, B, C and D. The legend explains the symbols.
A group of farmers needs water for crops and wants to ship its harvest to distant markets by boat. Click the town site on the map that best meets both needs.
Click on the figure to mark your answer (or focus it and use the arrow keys).
Hint
Look for a site that has fertile land and a water source, and that also connects to the harbor.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the map: Site B is on the fertile floodplain beside the Teller River, close to the harbor where the river meets the ocean. Site A is in the Dry Plains (less than 10 inches of rain a year), far from the river. Site C is in the Granite Mountains next to silver deposits. Site D is in the pine forest, away from the river.
Step by step:
Need 1, water for crops: the river and its floodplain provide water and good soil. Only Site B is on the floodplain.
Need 2, shipping by boat: Site B sits near the harbor, so crops can go out by sea, and the river links it to the interior.
Site A is dry and far from water; Site C has steep land and is far from the harbor; Site D has no river access.
The correct answer is Site B.
Tip: Throughout history, many cities grew where rivers meet the sea, because those sites combine fresh water, fertile soil and transportation.
Question 33 of 35 · Environment and societal development
Teller Basin: Choosing a Town Site
The schematic map shows the fictional Teller Basin in the mid-1800s, before most towns were built. Four possible town sites are marked A, B, C and D. The legend explains the symbols.
A mining company chooses Site C for a new town, even though the land there is steep and poor for farming. What best explains this choice?
Hint
What symbol on the map appears right next to Site C? Check the legend.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence from the map: Site C is in the Granite Mountains, next to two red diamond symbols. The legend shows that the red diamond means silver.
Step by step:
A mining company's main need is access to the mineral it mines, not farmland or a harbor.
Site C is the only site beside the silver deposits.
The other choices are not true of Site C: the fertile floodplain and the harbor are near Site B, on the opposite side of the map, and the map gives no information about rainfall in the mountains.
This shows a general pattern: valuable natural resources can draw settlement even to places with a harsh environment, as mining towns did in the American West.
The correct answer is Site C is next to silver deposits, a valuable natural resource.
Tip: On map questions, always read the legend. The key fact is often shown by a symbol rather than a label.
Question 34 of 35 · Human migration
Drag and dropThe California Gold Rush
(1) In January 1848, a carpenter named James Marshall found gold at Sutter's Mill on the American River in California. News spread slowly at first, but by 1849 tens of thousands of people were heading west. They became known as "forty-niners."
(2) Gold seekers came from the eastern United States, Latin America, Europe, China and Australia. Some sailed around South America or crossed Panama; others traveled for months by wagon across the plains and mountains. Many left behind farms that had suffered poor harvests, or towns with few jobs. Some migrants from China were escaping war and poverty in their home regions.
(3) San Francisco grew from a small settlement of about 1,000 people in 1848 into a city of tens of thousands within a few years. Stores, banks and shipping companies sprang up to serve the miners. California became a state in 1850.
(4) The gold rush also brought great harm. Miners and settlers took over the lands of California's Native peoples, and the Native population fell sharply because of violence, disease and starvation. Mining muddied rivers and washed away hillsides. Foreign-born miners faced discrimination, including a state tax on foreign miners passed in 1850.
(5) By the mid-1850s, most of the easy-to-reach gold was gone. Many newcomers stayed anyway and turned to farming, trade or other work, and California's population kept growing.
Drag each factor into the correct category for people who moved to California during the gold rush.
Push factors (reasons to leave home)
Pull factors (reasons to come to California)
Tap a tile, then tap a box to place it.
Hint
A push factor is a problem at home that drives people away. A pull factor is an attraction that draws people to a new place.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 2: "Many left behind farms that had suffered poor harvests, or towns with few jobs. Some migrants from China were escaping war and poverty in their home regions." Paragraph 1: Marshall "found gold at Sutter's Mill." Paragraph 3: "Stores, banks and shipping companies sprang up to serve the miners."
Step by step:
Poor harvests on farms back home — a problem where people lived, so a push factor.
War and poverty in parts of China — conditions people were escaping, so a push factor.
News of gold found at Sutter's Mill — an attraction in California, so a pull factor.
Business opportunities in a fast-growing San Francisco — an attraction in California, so a pull factor.
Push: poor harvests; war and poverty in China. Pull: news of gold; business opportunities in San Francisco.
Tip: Ask "Where is this happening?" If it happens in the place people left, it is a push factor. If it happens in the place they go, it is a pull factor.
Question 35 of 35 · Human migration
The California Gold Rush
(1) In January 1848, a carpenter named James Marshall found gold at Sutter's Mill on the American River in California. News spread slowly at first, but by 1849 tens of thousands of people were heading west. They became known as "forty-niners."
(2) Gold seekers came from the eastern United States, Latin America, Europe, China and Australia. Some sailed around South America or crossed Panama; others traveled for months by wagon across the plains and mountains. Many left behind farms that had suffered poor harvests, or towns with few jobs. Some migrants from China were escaping war and poverty in their home regions.
(3) San Francisco grew from a small settlement of about 1,000 people in 1848 into a city of tens of thousands within a few years. Stores, banks and shipping companies sprang up to serve the miners. California became a state in 1850.
(4) The gold rush also brought great harm. Miners and settlers took over the lands of California's Native peoples, and the Native population fell sharply because of violence, disease and starvation. Mining muddied rivers and washed away hillsides. Foreign-born miners faced discrimination, including a state tax on foreign miners passed in 1850.
(5) By the mid-1850s, most of the easy-to-reach gold was gone. Many newcomers stayed anyway and turned to farming, trade or other work, and California's population kept growing.
Which conclusion about the effects of the gold rush is best supported by the passage?
Hint
A good conclusion must fit everything the passage says. Check each choice for anything that contradicts the text.
Step-by-step solution
Evidence: Paragraph 3: San Francisco grew to "a city of tens of thousands within a few years" and "California became a state in 1850." Paragraph 4: "the Native population fell sharply because of violence, disease and starvation." Paragraph 5: "Many newcomers stayed anyway … and California's population kept growing."
Step by step:
The gold rush brought rapid growth and statehood (paragraph 3) and great losses for Native peoples (paragraph 4). A conclusion that includes both sides fits the evidence. ✔
Paragraph 5 says many newcomers stayed and the population kept growing, so "most returned home" and "population fell" are contradicted. ✘
Paragraph 2 lists migrants from Latin America, Europe, China and Australia, so "few from other countries" is wrong. ✘
The correct answer is the gold rush brought rapid growth and statehood to California but caused great losses for its Native peoples.
Tip: History questions often reward balanced conclusions. If a passage describes both benefits and harms, the best answer usually reflects both.