GED Diagnostic Practice Test

Passage 1

Questions 1-7 refer to this passage

1977–1981: The Presidency of Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter took office in January 1977 as a Washington outsider, pledging to restore a sense a morality to both domestic and foreign policy following the traumas of the Vietnam War and Watergate. Morality, he believed, existed as the best foundation for exerting U.S. power and influence. Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.

Although the former Governor of Georgia had limited foreign policy experience, Carter had engaged in international trade issues and had been invited to join the Trilateral Commission, a consortium of business executives, government officials, and academics from North America, Japan, and Europe. These activities broadened his understanding of global issues and brought him into contact with individuals who had spent much of their careers in Washington, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance, both of whom had served in various capacities during the Lyndon b. Johnson administration. Carter relied on Brzezinski and Vance to advise him during the 1976 presidential campaign and offered them the positions of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, respectively, after he won election in November 1976. Carter’s foreign policy team also included former Senator Walter F. Mondale (DFL-Minnesota), whom Carter would select as his vice presidential running mate and former California Institute of Technology President Harold Brown, whom Carter would nominate for Secretary of Defense. These principals, later including Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, established a collegial working relationship, characterized by their weekly foreign policy breakfasts. Vance, Brzezinski, and Brown also met weekly for an informal V–B–B luncheon to discuss decisions that did not rise to the level of a formal interagency meeting. Although Vance and Brzezinski respected one another, they differed over the administration’s approach to certain issues, notably relations with the Soviet Union. This tension became more pronounced and visible by the midpoint of the administration.

Carter’s management of foreign policy reflected his preference for simplifying the structures established by his predecessors. In two Presidential Directives issued on January 20, 1977, Carter stated the direction of the work of the National Security Council and participating agencies and the reorganization of the National Security Council. PD/NSC–1 established both the Presidential Review Memorandum, designed to structure the reviews and analyses of foreign policy issues undertaken by agencies, and the Presidential Directive, the statement of presidential decisions on national security matters. PD/NSC–2 reaffirmed the functions, membership, and responsibilities of the National Security Council, as set out in the National Security Act of 1947 and also created the NSC Policy Review Committee.

1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan

The principal foreign policy framework for the Ronald Reagan administration rejected acquiescence in the Cold War status quo that had emerged during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies. Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism. This more confrontational approach eventually came to be labeled the “Reagan Doctrine,” which advocated opposition to Communist-supported regimes wherever they existed, as well as a willingness to directly challenge the Soviet Union on a variety of fronts.

Often referred to as “the great communicator,” Reagan utilized his rhetorical skills to frame the Cold War contest as a fundamental clash between good and evil. In his first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, the new President contrasted the “enemies of freedom” as doomed to fail when faced with the “will and moral courage of free men and women.” Later that year in an address at Notre Dame University he stated that “the West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism.” In 1983, he famously characterized the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” In 1987, standing in front of the Berlin Wall constructed by the East German communist regime a quarter-century earlier to stem the flow of East Germans to the West, Reagan challenged the patron of the East German regime, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s many memorable public addresses served as an important tool to galvanize support for policies that often sparked considerable controversy.

The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets. During his two terms in office, Reagan successfully advocated increasing the Defense Department budget by 35%. The United States supported Afghan resistance organizations opposing the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, anti-communist forces in Angola, and the Contras in Nicaragua. In 1983 American forces invaded Grenada to forestall installation of a Marxist regime. The administration also greatly increased spending on the U.S. Information Agency, especially Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, signaling the importance placed on challenging Soviet ideology throughout the world.

Conversely, heightened tensions also led Reagan administration officials to attempt conciliatory measures designed to reduce the threat of direct confrontation, especially nuclear war. In 1982, Reagan broached the idea of substantially decreasing nuclear weapon stockpiles, which eventually resulted in the landmark Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as the principal Soviet leader provided Reagan with a partner willing to engage in substantive negotiations. A series of summit meetings ensued which reduced tensions and produced concrete results, such as the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that eliminated the deployment of theater-level nuclear missiles in Europe.

Considering the language and rhetoric in the passages, which of the following accurately reflects how the author characterizes the difference between Presidents Carter and Reagan?

Passage 1

Questions 1-7 refer to this passage

1977–1981: The Presidency of Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter took office in January 1977 as a Washington outsider, pledging to restore a sense a morality to both domestic and foreign policy following the traumas of the Vietnam War and Watergate. Morality, he believed, existed as the best foundation for exerting U.S. power and influence. Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.

Although the former Governor of Georgia had limited foreign policy experience, Carter had engaged in international trade issues and had been invited to join the Trilateral Commission, a consortium of business executives, government officials, and academics from North America, Japan, and Europe. These activities broadened his understanding of global issues and brought him into contact with individuals who had spent much of their careers in Washington, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance, both of whom had served in various capacities during the Lyndon b. Johnson administration. Carter relied on Brzezinski and Vance to advise him during the 1976 presidential campaign and offered them the positions of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, respectively, after he won election in November 1976. Carter’s foreign policy team also included former Senator Walter F. Mondale (DFL-Minnesota), whom Carter would select as his vice presidential running mate and former California Institute of Technology President Harold Brown, whom Carter would nominate for Secretary of Defense. These principals, later including Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, established a collegial working relationship, characterized by their weekly foreign policy breakfasts. Vance, Brzezinski, and Brown also met weekly for an informal V–B–B luncheon to discuss decisions that did not rise to the level of a formal interagency meeting. Although Vance and Brzezinski respected one another, they differed over the administration’s approach to certain issues, notably relations with the Soviet Union. This tension became more pronounced and visible by the midpoint of the administration.

Carter’s management of foreign policy reflected his preference for simplifying the structures established by his predecessors. In two Presidential Directives issued on January 20, 1977, Carter stated the direction of the work of the National Security Council and participating agencies and the reorganization of the National Security Council. PD/NSC–1 established both the Presidential Review Memorandum, designed to structure the reviews and analyses of foreign policy issues undertaken by agencies, and the Presidential Directive, the statement of presidential decisions on national security matters. PD/NSC–2 reaffirmed the functions, membership, and responsibilities of the National Security Council, as set out in the National Security Act of 1947 and also created the NSC Policy Review Committee.

1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan

The principal foreign policy framework for the Ronald Reagan administration rejected acquiescence in the Cold War status quo that had emerged during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies. Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism. This more confrontational approach eventually came to be labeled the “Reagan Doctrine,” which advocated opposition to Communist-supported regimes wherever they existed, as well as a willingness to directly challenge the Soviet Union on a variety of fronts.

Often referred to as “the great communicator,” Reagan utilized his rhetorical skills to frame the Cold War contest as a fundamental clash between good and evil. In his first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, the new President contrasted the “enemies of freedom” as doomed to fail when faced with the “will and moral courage of free men and women.” Later that year in an address at Notre Dame University he stated that “the West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism.” In 1983, he famously characterized the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” In 1987, standing in front of the Berlin Wall constructed by the East German communist regime a quarter-century earlier to stem the flow of East Germans to the West, Reagan challenged the patron of the East German regime, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s many memorable public addresses served as an important tool to galvanize support for policies that often sparked considerable controversy.

The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets. During his two terms in office, Reagan successfully advocated increasing the Defense Department budget by 35%. The United States supported Afghan resistance organizations opposing the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, anti-communist forces in Angola, and the Contras in Nicaragua. In 1983 American forces invaded Grenada to forestall installation of a Marxist regime. The administration also greatly increased spending on the U.S. Information Agency, especially Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, signaling the importance placed on challenging Soviet ideology throughout the world.

Conversely, heightened tensions also led Reagan administration officials to attempt conciliatory measures designed to reduce the threat of direct confrontation, especially nuclear war. In 1982, Reagan broached the idea of substantially decreasing nuclear weapon stockpiles, which eventually resulted in the landmark Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as the principal Soviet leader provided Reagan with a partner willing to engage in substantive negotiations. A series of summit meetings ensued which reduced tensions and produced concrete results, such as the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that eliminated the deployment of theater-level nuclear missiles in Europe.

Considering the contrasting foreign policy approaches of Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, which element from Carter’s administration aligns more with Reagan’s framework?

Passage 1

Questions 1-7 refer to this passage

1977–1981: The Presidency of Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter took office in January 1977 as a Washington outsider, pledging to restore a sense a morality to both domestic and foreign policy following the traumas of the Vietnam War and Watergate. Morality, he believed, existed as the best foundation for exerting U.S. power and influence. Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.

Although the former Governor of Georgia had limited foreign policy experience, Carter had engaged in international trade issues and had been invited to join the Trilateral Commission, a consortium of business executives, government officials, and academics from North America, Japan, and Europe. These activities broadened his understanding of global issues and brought him into contact with individuals who had spent much of their careers in Washington, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance, both of whom had served in various capacities during the Lyndon b. Johnson administration. Carter relied on Brzezinski and Vance to advise him during the 1976 presidential campaign and offered them the positions of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, respectively, after he won election in November 1976. Carter’s foreign policy team also included former Senator Walter F. Mondale (DFL-Minnesota), whom Carter would select as his vice presidential running mate and former California Institute of Technology President Harold Brown, whom Carter would nominate for Secretary of Defense. These principals, later including Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, established a collegial working relationship, characterized by their weekly foreign policy breakfasts. Vance, Brzezinski, and Brown also met weekly for an informal V–B–B luncheon to discuss decisions that did not rise to the level of a formal interagency meeting. Although Vance and Brzezinski respected one another, they differed over the administration’s approach to certain issues, notably relations with the Soviet Union. This tension became more pronounced and visible by the midpoint of the administration.

Carter’s management of foreign policy reflected his preference for simplifying the structures established by his predecessors. In two Presidential Directives issued on January 20, 1977, Carter stated the direction of the work of the National Security Council and participating agencies and the reorganization of the National Security Council. PD/NSC–1 established both the Presidential Review Memorandum, designed to structure the reviews and analyses of foreign policy issues undertaken by agencies, and the Presidential Directive, the statement of presidential decisions on national security matters. PD/NSC–2 reaffirmed the functions, membership, and responsibilities of the National Security Council, as set out in the National Security Act of 1947 and also created the NSC Policy Review Committee.

1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan

The principal foreign policy framework for the Ronald Reagan administration rejected acquiescence in the Cold War status quo that had emerged during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies. Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism. This more confrontational approach eventually came to be labeled the “Reagan Doctrine,” which advocated opposition to Communist-supported regimes wherever they existed, as well as a willingness to directly challenge the Soviet Union on a variety of fronts.

Often referred to as “the great communicator,” Reagan utilized his rhetorical skills to frame the Cold War contest as a fundamental clash between good and evil. In his first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, the new President contrasted the “enemies of freedom” as doomed to fail when faced with the “will and moral courage of free men and women.” Later that year in an address at Notre Dame University he stated that “the West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism.” In 1983, he famously characterized the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” In 1987, standing in front of the Berlin Wall constructed by the East German communist regime a quarter-century earlier to stem the flow of East Germans to the West, Reagan challenged the patron of the East German regime, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s many memorable public addresses served as an important tool to galvanize support for policies that often sparked considerable controversy.

The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets. During his two terms in office, Reagan successfully advocated increasing the Defense Department budget by 35%. The United States supported Afghan resistance organizations opposing the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, anti-communist forces in Angola, and the Contras in Nicaragua. In 1983 American forces invaded Grenada to forestall installation of a Marxist regime. The administration also greatly increased spending on the U.S. Information Agency, especially Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, signaling the importance placed on challenging Soviet ideology throughout the world.

Conversely, heightened tensions also led Reagan administration officials to attempt conciliatory measures designed to reduce the threat of direct confrontation, especially nuclear war. In 1982, Reagan broached the idea of substantially decreasing nuclear weapon stockpiles, which eventually resulted in the landmark Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as the principal Soviet leader provided Reagan with a partner willing to engage in substantive negotiations. A series of summit meetings ensued which reduced tensions and produced concrete results, such as the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that eliminated the deployment of theater-level nuclear missiles in Europe.

Read the below two excerpts to answer the question.

“Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.”

“Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism.”

How do the language choices in the excerpts from Carter and Reagan contribute to the presentation of their foreign policy visions?

Passage 1

Questions 1-7 refer to this passage

1977–1981: The Presidency of Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter took office in January 1977 as a Washington outsider, pledging to restore a sense a morality to both domestic and foreign policy following the traumas of the Vietnam War and Watergate. Morality, he believed, existed as the best foundation for exerting U.S. power and influence. Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.

Although the former Governor of Georgia had limited foreign policy experience, Carter had engaged in international trade issues and had been invited to join the Trilateral Commission, a consortium of business executives, government officials, and academics from North America, Japan, and Europe. These activities broadened his understanding of global issues and brought him into contact with individuals who had spent much of their careers in Washington, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance, both of whom had served in various capacities during the Lyndon b. Johnson administration. Carter relied on Brzezinski and Vance to advise him during the 1976 presidential campaign and offered them the positions of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, respectively, after he won election in November 1976. Carter’s foreign policy team also included former Senator Walter F. Mondale (DFL-Minnesota), whom Carter would select as his vice presidential running mate and former California Institute of Technology President Harold Brown, whom Carter would nominate for Secretary of Defense. These principals, later including Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, established a collegial working relationship, characterized by their weekly foreign policy breakfasts. Vance, Brzezinski, and Brown also met weekly for an informal V–B–B luncheon to discuss decisions that did not rise to the level of a formal interagency meeting. Although Vance and Brzezinski respected one another, they differed over the administration’s approach to certain issues, notably relations with the Soviet Union. This tension became more pronounced and visible by the midpoint of the administration.

Carter’s management of foreign policy reflected his preference for simplifying the structures established by his predecessors. In two Presidential Directives issued on January 20, 1977, Carter stated the direction of the work of the National Security Council and participating agencies and the reorganization of the National Security Council. PD/NSC–1 established both the Presidential Review Memorandum, designed to structure the reviews and analyses of foreign policy issues undertaken by agencies, and the Presidential Directive, the statement of presidential decisions on national security matters. PD/NSC–2 reaffirmed the functions, membership, and responsibilities of the National Security Council, as set out in the National Security Act of 1947 and also created the NSC Policy Review Committee.

1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan

The principal foreign policy framework for the Ronald Reagan administration rejected acquiescence in the Cold War status quo that had emerged during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies. Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism. This more confrontational approach eventually came to be labeled the “Reagan Doctrine,” which advocated opposition to Communist-supported regimes wherever they existed, as well as a willingness to directly challenge the Soviet Union on a variety of fronts.

Often referred to as “the great communicator,” Reagan utilized his rhetorical skills to frame the Cold War contest as a fundamental clash between good and evil. In his first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, the new President contrasted the “enemies of freedom” as doomed to fail when faced with the “will and moral courage of free men and women.” Later that year in an address at Notre Dame University he stated that “the West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism.” In 1983, he famously characterized the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” In 1987, standing in front of the Berlin Wall constructed by the East German communist regime a quarter-century earlier to stem the flow of East Germans to the West, Reagan challenged the patron of the East German regime, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s many memorable public addresses served as an important tool to galvanize support for policies that often sparked considerable controversy.

The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets. During his two terms in office, Reagan successfully advocated increasing the Defense Department budget by 35%. The United States supported Afghan resistance organizations opposing the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, anti-communist forces in Angola, and the Contras in Nicaragua. In 1983 American forces invaded Grenada to forestall installation of a Marxist regime. The administration also greatly increased spending on the U.S. Information Agency, especially Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, signaling the importance placed on challenging Soviet ideology throughout the world.

Conversely, heightened tensions also led Reagan administration officials to attempt conciliatory measures designed to reduce the threat of direct confrontation, especially nuclear war. In 1982, Reagan broached the idea of substantially decreasing nuclear weapon stockpiles, which eventually resulted in the landmark Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as the principal Soviet leader provided Reagan with a partner willing to engage in substantive negotiations. A series of summit meetings ensued which reduced tensions and produced concrete results, such as the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that eliminated the deployment of theater-level nuclear missiles in Europe.

Study the excerpt below from the passage “1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan” to answer the question.

“The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets.”

What specific evidence from the excerpt supports the main idea that the Reagan administration pursued a strategy of technological superiority to counter the Soviet Union during the Cold War?

Passage 1

Questions 1-7 refer to this passage

1977–1981: The Presidency of Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter took office in January 1977 as a Washington outsider, pledging to restore a sense a morality to both domestic and foreign policy following the traumas of the Vietnam War and Watergate. Morality, he believed, existed as the best foundation for exerting U.S. power and influence. Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.

Although the former Governor of Georgia had limited foreign policy experience, Carter had engaged in international trade issues and had been invited to join the Trilateral Commission, a consortium of business executives, government officials, and academics from North America, Japan, and Europe. These activities broadened his understanding of global issues and brought him into contact with individuals who had spent much of their careers in Washington, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance, both of whom had served in various capacities during the Lyndon b. Johnson administration. Carter relied on Brzezinski and Vance to advise him during the 1976 presidential campaign and offered them the positions of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, respectively, after he won election in November 1976. Carter’s foreign policy team also included former Senator Walter F. Mondale (DFL-Minnesota), whom Carter would select as his vice presidential running mate and former California Institute of Technology President Harold Brown, whom Carter would nominate for Secretary of Defense. These principals, later including Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, established a collegial working relationship, characterized by their weekly foreign policy breakfasts. Vance, Brzezinski, and Brown also met weekly for an informal V–B–B luncheon to discuss decisions that did not rise to the level of a formal interagency meeting. Although Vance and Brzezinski respected one another, they differed over the administration’s approach to certain issues, notably relations with the Soviet Union. This tension became more pronounced and visible by the midpoint of the administration.

Carter’s management of foreign policy reflected his preference for simplifying the structures established by his predecessors. In two Presidential Directives issued on January 20, 1977, Carter stated the direction of the work of the National Security Council and participating agencies and the reorganization of the National Security Council. PD/NSC–1 established both the Presidential Review Memorandum, designed to structure the reviews and analyses of foreign policy issues undertaken by agencies, and the Presidential Directive, the statement of presidential decisions on national security matters. PD/NSC–2 reaffirmed the functions, membership, and responsibilities of the National Security Council, as set out in the National Security Act of 1947 and also created the NSC Policy Review Committee.

1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan

The principal foreign policy framework for the Ronald Reagan administration rejected acquiescence in the Cold War status quo that had emerged during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies. Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism. This more confrontational approach eventually came to be labeled the “Reagan Doctrine,” which advocated opposition to Communist-supported regimes wherever they existed, as well as a willingness to directly challenge the Soviet Union on a variety of fronts.

Often referred to as “the great communicator,” Reagan utilized his rhetorical skills to frame the Cold War contest as a fundamental clash between good and evil. In his first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, the new President contrasted the “enemies of freedom” as doomed to fail when faced with the “will and moral courage of free men and women.” Later that year in an address at Notre Dame University he stated that “the West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism.” In 1983, he famously characterized the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” In 1987, standing in front of the Berlin Wall constructed by the East German communist regime a quarter-century earlier to stem the flow of East Germans to the West, Reagan challenged the patron of the East German regime, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s many memorable public addresses served as an important tool to galvanize support for policies that often sparked considerable controversy.

The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets. During his two terms in office, Reagan successfully advocated increasing the Defense Department budget by 35%. The United States supported Afghan resistance organizations opposing the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, anti-communist forces in Angola, and the Contras in Nicaragua. In 1983 American forces invaded Grenada to forestall installation of a Marxist regime. The administration also greatly increased spending on the U.S. Information Agency, especially Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, signaling the importance placed on challenging Soviet ideology throughout the world.

Conversely, heightened tensions also led Reagan administration officials to attempt conciliatory measures designed to reduce the threat of direct confrontation, especially nuclear war. In 1982, Reagan broached the idea of substantially decreasing nuclear weapon stockpiles, which eventually resulted in the landmark Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as the principal Soviet leader provided Reagan with a partner willing to engage in substantive negotiations. A series of summit meetings ensued which reduced tensions and produced concrete results, such as the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that eliminated the deployment of theater-level nuclear missiles in Europe.

Which of the following statements best captures the relationship between President Carter’s foreign policy management and his desire to simplify existing structures?

Passage 1

Questions 1-7 refer to this passage

1977–1981: The Presidency of Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter took office in January 1977 as a Washington outsider, pledging to restore a sense a morality to both domestic and foreign policy following the traumas of the Vietnam War and Watergate. Morality, he believed, existed as the best foundation for exerting U.S. power and influence. Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.

Although the former Governor of Georgia had limited foreign policy experience, Carter had engaged in international trade issues and had been invited to join the Trilateral Commission, a consortium of business executives, government officials, and academics from North America, Japan, and Europe. These activities broadened his understanding of global issues and brought him into contact with individuals who had spent much of their careers in Washington, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance, both of whom had served in various capacities during the Lyndon b. Johnson administration. Carter relied on Brzezinski and Vance to advise him during the 1976 presidential campaign and offered them the positions of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, respectively, after he won election in November 1976. Carter’s foreign policy team also included former Senator Walter F. Mondale (DFL-Minnesota), whom Carter would select as his vice presidential running mate and former California Institute of Technology President Harold Brown, whom Carter would nominate for Secretary of Defense. These principals, later including Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, established a collegial working relationship, characterized by their weekly foreign policy breakfasts. Vance, Brzezinski, and Brown also met weekly for an informal V–B–B luncheon to discuss decisions that did not rise to the level of a formal interagency meeting. Although Vance and Brzezinski respected one another, they differed over the administration’s approach to certain issues, notably relations with the Soviet Union. This tension became more pronounced and visible by the midpoint of the administration.

Carter’s management of foreign policy reflected his preference for simplifying the structures established by his predecessors. In two Presidential Directives issued on January 20, 1977, Carter stated the direction of the work of the National Security Council and participating agencies and the reorganization of the National Security Council. PD/NSC–1 established both the Presidential Review Memorandum, designed to structure the reviews and analyses of foreign policy issues undertaken by agencies, and the Presidential Directive, the statement of presidential decisions on national security matters. PD/NSC–2 reaffirmed the functions, membership, and responsibilities of the National Security Council, as set out in the National Security Act of 1947 and also created the NSC Policy Review Committee.

1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan

The principal foreign policy framework for the Ronald Reagan administration rejected acquiescence in the Cold War status quo that had emerged during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies. Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism. This more confrontational approach eventually came to be labeled the “Reagan Doctrine,” which advocated opposition to Communist-supported regimes wherever they existed, as well as a willingness to directly challenge the Soviet Union on a variety of fronts.

Often referred to as “the great communicator,” Reagan utilized his rhetorical skills to frame the Cold War contest as a fundamental clash between good and evil. In his first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, the new President contrasted the “enemies of freedom” as doomed to fail when faced with the “will and moral courage of free men and women.” Later that year in an address at Notre Dame University he stated that “the West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism.” In 1983, he famously characterized the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” In 1987, standing in front of the Berlin Wall constructed by the East German communist regime a quarter-century earlier to stem the flow of East Germans to the West, Reagan challenged the patron of the East German regime, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s many memorable public addresses served as an important tool to galvanize support for policies that often sparked considerable controversy.

The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets. During his two terms in office, Reagan successfully advocated increasing the Defense Department budget by 35%. The United States supported Afghan resistance organizations opposing the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, anti-communist forces in Angola, and the Contras in Nicaragua. In 1983 American forces invaded Grenada to forestall installation of a Marxist regime. The administration also greatly increased spending on the U.S. Information Agency, especially Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, signaling the importance placed on challenging Soviet ideology throughout the world.

Conversely, heightened tensions also led Reagan administration officials to attempt conciliatory measures designed to reduce the threat of direct confrontation, especially nuclear war. In 1982, Reagan broached the idea of substantially decreasing nuclear weapon stockpiles, which eventually resulted in the landmark Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as the principal Soviet leader provided Reagan with a partner willing to engage in substantive negotiations. A series of summit meetings ensued which reduced tensions and produced concrete results, such as the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that eliminated the deployment of theater-level nuclear missiles in Europe.

How did President Jimmy Carter and President Ronald Reagan converge in their efforts to address nuclear threats during their respective administrations?

Passage 1

Questions 1-7 refer to this passage

1977–1981: The Presidency of Jimmy Carter

President Jimmy Carter took office in January 1977 as a Washington outsider, pledging to restore a sense a morality to both domestic and foreign policy following the traumas of the Vietnam War and Watergate. Morality, he believed, existed as the best foundation for exerting U.S. power and influence. Carter envisioned that his foreign policy, “derived from a longer view of global change,” would move the United States away from operating within a bipolar or tripolar context to one taking into account an increasingly complicated and interdependent world.

Although the former Governor of Georgia had limited foreign policy experience, Carter had engaged in international trade issues and had been invited to join the Trilateral Commission, a consortium of business executives, government officials, and academics from North America, Japan, and Europe. These activities broadened his understanding of global issues and brought him into contact with individuals who had spent much of their careers in Washington, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance, both of whom had served in various capacities during the Lyndon b. Johnson administration. Carter relied on Brzezinski and Vance to advise him during the 1976 presidential campaign and offered them the positions of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, respectively, after he won election in November 1976. Carter’s foreign policy team also included former Senator Walter F. Mondale (DFL-Minnesota), whom Carter would select as his vice presidential running mate and former California Institute of Technology President Harold Brown, whom Carter would nominate for Secretary of Defense. These principals, later including Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, established a collegial working relationship, characterized by their weekly foreign policy breakfasts. Vance, Brzezinski, and Brown also met weekly for an informal V–B–B luncheon to discuss decisions that did not rise to the level of a formal interagency meeting. Although Vance and Brzezinski respected one another, they differed over the administration’s approach to certain issues, notably relations with the Soviet Union. This tension became more pronounced and visible by the midpoint of the administration.

Carter’s management of foreign policy reflected his preference for simplifying the structures established by his predecessors. In two Presidential Directives issued on January 20, 1977, Carter stated the direction of the work of the National Security Council and participating agencies and the reorganization of the National Security Council. PD/NSC–1 established both the Presidential Review Memorandum, designed to structure the reviews and analyses of foreign policy issues undertaken by agencies, and the Presidential Directive, the statement of presidential decisions on national security matters. PD/NSC–2 reaffirmed the functions, membership, and responsibilities of the National Security Council, as set out in the National Security Act of 1947 and also created the NSC Policy Review Committee.

1981–1988: The Presidency of Ronald W. Reagan

The principal foreign policy framework for the Ronald Reagan administration rejected acquiescence in the Cold War status quo that had emerged during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies. Reagan objected to the implied moral equivalency of détente, insisting instead on the superiority of representative government, free-market capitalism, and freedom of conscience over what he viewed as godless, collectivist, Communism. This more confrontational approach eventually came to be labeled the “Reagan Doctrine,” which advocated opposition to Communist-supported regimes wherever they existed, as well as a willingness to directly challenge the Soviet Union on a variety of fronts.

Often referred to as “the great communicator,” Reagan utilized his rhetorical skills to frame the Cold War contest as a fundamental clash between good and evil. In his first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, the new President contrasted the “enemies of freedom” as doomed to fail when faced with the “will and moral courage of free men and women.” Later that year in an address at Notre Dame University he stated that “the West won’t contain Communism, it will transcend Communism.” In 1983, he famously characterized the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” In 1987, standing in front of the Berlin Wall constructed by the East German communist regime a quarter-century earlier to stem the flow of East Germans to the West, Reagan challenged the patron of the East German regime, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s many memorable public addresses served as an important tool to galvanize support for policies that often sparked considerable controversy.

The Reagan administration advocated a wide array of initiatives that heightened confrontation with the U.S.S.R. and its allies. Reagan engineered a significant increase in U.S. defense spending designed to modernize existing forces and achieve technological advances the Soviet Union could not match. For example, the administration advocated building a much larger navy with enhanced technical capabilities, deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe, development of terrain-hugging cruise missiles difficult both to detect and to shoot down, and the Strategic Defense Initiative, which held out the prospect of seizing the ultimate “high ground”—outer space—by preventing intercontinental nuclear missile warheads from reaching their targets. During his two terms in office, Reagan successfully advocated increasing the Defense Department budget by 35%. The United States supported Afghan resistance organizations opposing the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, anti-communist forces in Angola, and the Contras in Nicaragua. In 1983 American forces invaded Grenada to forestall installation of a Marxist regime. The administration also greatly increased spending on the U.S. Information Agency, especially Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, signaling the importance placed on challenging Soviet ideology throughout the world.

Conversely, heightened tensions also led Reagan administration officials to attempt conciliatory measures designed to reduce the threat of direct confrontation, especially nuclear war. In 1982, Reagan broached the idea of substantially decreasing nuclear weapon stockpiles, which eventually resulted in the landmark Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START). The emergence of Mikhail Gorbachev as the principal Soviet leader provided Reagan with a partner willing to engage in substantive negotiations. A series of summit meetings ensued which reduced tensions and produced concrete results, such as the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that eliminated the deployment of theater-level nuclear missiles in Europe.

In the context of President Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy and the excerpt provided, which pair best represents Carter’s approach to managing U.S. power and influence?

What is the y-intercept of the line passing through the points (-2, 5) and (1, -1), and also find the slope of the line.

Which of the following shows the result of \frac{x^2+2x-8}{x^2-4}-\frac{x+3}{x+2} ?

What are the major milestones in human evolution?

The human lineage diverged from that of apes at least seven million years ago and maybe as long as 13 million years ago. The earliest undisputed members of our lineage to regularly walk upright were the australopithecines, of which the most famous is Lucy’s species, Australopithecus afarensis. (Lucy herself is dated to 3.2 million years ago.) The oldest known fossil attributed to our genus, Homo, dates to about 2.8 million years ago and was reported just this year. The ability to make stone tools was once thought to be the hallmark of our genus. But the oldest stone tools are now thought to be 3.3 million years old. Either they were made by australopithecines like Lucy—or scientists simply haven’t yet found the early form of Homo that made them. Like australopithecines, early Homo species, such as H. erectus and H. habilis, walked on two legs.

There’s considerable debate over when our ancestors first harnessed fire—it may have been anywhere from 1.8 million to around 800,000 years ago. According to one theory, the invention of cooking allowed us to gain more energy from meat, which fueled the dramatic evolution of the human brain. Bigger brains and more dexterous hands in turn were the prerequisite for the developments that set humans apart, including complex language, art, and agriculture, all of which emerged in the past 100,000 years.

Where did all this happen, and why does it matter where?

Both genetic and fossil evidence show that until relatively recently, human evolution happened in Africa. Whether the genus Homo first emerged in southern or in eastern Africa remains unclear. Knowing where our species evolved matters because the environment it adapted to helped shape the genetic makeup we still carry with us today. Where we came from is the first chapter in the long story of how we got to where we are now.

Around 60,000 years ago—again according to both genetic and fossil evidence—modern humans migrated out of Africa and began colonizing the world. Genetic evidence suggests that soon after leaving Africa, they interbred to some extent with the Neanderthals and a mysterious population in Asia called the Denisovans. Homo sapiens is now the only species of human on Earth. But that’s been true for less than 30,000 years.

Which of the following represents the accurate chronological sequence of key events in human evolution and migration, considering both genetic and fossil evidence?

Factors That Affect Rate

There are four main factors that can affect the reaction rate of a chemical reaction:

Reactant concentration: Increasing the concentration of one or more reactants will often increase the rate of reaction. This occurs because a higher concentration of a reactant will lead to more collisions of that reactant in a specific time period.

Physical state of the reactants and surface area: If reactant molecules exist in different phases, as in a heterogeneous mixture, the rate of reaction will be limited by the surface area of the phases that are in contact. For example, if a solid metal reactant and gas reactant are mixed, only the molecules present on the surface of the metal are able to collide with the gas molecules. Therefore, increasing the surface area of the metal by pounding it flat or cutting it into many pieces will increase its reaction rate.

Temperature: An increase in temperature typically increases the rate of reaction. An increase in temperature will raise the average kinetic energy of the reactant molecules. Therefore, a greater proportion of molecules will have the minimum energy necessary for an effective collision.

Presence of a catalyst: A catalyst is a substance that accelerates a reaction by participating in it without being consumed. Catalysts provide an alternate reaction pathway to obtain products. They are critical to many biochemical reactions. They will be examined further in the section “Catalysis.”

A chemistry teacher is conducting an experiment to investigate the reaction rates of different substances. The teacher observes the following data:

Based on the data, substance (choose a, b, or c) exhibits a reaction rate that is likely affected by temperature and substance (choose d, e, or f) exhibits a reaction rate that is likely affected by concentration.

Factorize: 6x² – 19x + 10

A detailed map shows the distance between Rivertown and Mountainview as 8 cm. The scale of the map is 1.2 cm = 60 miles. How far apart are the actual cities?

Definitions for the following terms are given below:

• Checks and balances: A system in government where different branches have the power to limit or control the actions of other branches to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful.
• Executive supremacy: A system in government where the executive branch, headed by the president or a similar leader, holds the most authority and power over the other branches.
• Judicial review: The power of the judiciary, particularly the courts, to review and potentially invalidate laws or actions by the executive and legislative branches that are deemed unconstitutional.
• Decentralization: The dispersal of power or authority away from a central authority or government to smaller, local levels or entities, allowing for more autonomy and decision-making at those levels.

Diagram A:

Diagram B:

Consider Diagram A, illustrating the separation of powers in a democratic government, and Diagram B, representing the federal structure of government. What democratic principle or concept is shown in both of these diagrams?

2021 FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION

• 44.9M people
• 13.6%

2020 FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION

• 44.2M people
• 13.5%

As of 2021, 13.6% of United States residents (44.9M people) were born outside of the country. In 2020, the percentage of foreign-born citizens was 13.5%, meaning that the rate has been increasing.

If the data is plotted on the graph below, Select the correct point which represents the number of foreign-born citizens in the year 2019.

Which of the following values of x makes the expression \frac{10\left(x-2\right)}{\left(x-1\right)\left(3x+3\right)} undefined?

Find the number of cuboidal boxes that can fit inside a box shaped like a 25-meter by 20-meter by 10-meter cuboid if each box has a volume of 10 cubic meters.

A research team is studying the energy flow within a complex ecosystem. They collected data on the energy distribution among trophic levels in a forest ecosystem over a year. The graph below represents the energy pyramid of the ecosystem they studied.

Based on the provided energy pyramid graph and the ecosystem’s data, which of the following statements regarding the probability of energy transfer among trophic levels is most accurate?

Scientists have been studying halophiles, organisms that thrive in high-salinity environments, and psychrophiles, which are adapted to extremely cold conditions. These studies provide insights into life’s adaptability and raise intriguing possibilities about life on other planets:

I. Halophiles are often found in environments like salt flats and brines, exhibiting unique cellular mechanisms to maintain balance in high-salinity conditions.
II. Psychrophiles, discovered in Earth’s polar ice caps and deep-sea waters, possess enzymes that remain functional at sub-zero temperatures, enabling their survival and metabolic activity in extremely cold environments.

Considering the prospects of extraterrestrial life, which hypothesis appears most plausible?

The volume of a cube is represented by the expression x^3-6x^2+12x-8 . What is the length of one side of the cube?

The sum of two numbers is 13. The larger number is 4 more than twice the smaller number. Find the two numbers.

Gender distribution of the resident population of the United States from 1980 to 2022 (in millions)

In terms of population size, the sex ratio in the United States favors females, although the gender gap is remaining stable. In 2010, there were around 5.17 million more women, with the difference projected to decrease to around 3 million by 2027.

In the United States, the resident population was estimated to be around 331.89 million in 2021. The gender distribution of the nation has remained steady for several years, with women accounting for approximately 51.1 percent of the population since 2013. Females outnumbered males in the majority of states across the country in 2020, and there were eleven states where the gender ratio favored men.

Select the appropriate term from the options below hat would complete the sentence appropriately:

In 2019, there were more women than men in all three of those areas, but Jackson, Missouri, was the metro area with the highest share of female population. As of July 1, 2022, there were (choose a or b) males and (choose c or d) females living in the United States. The overall population of the United States has remained steady since 2010.

To Do Nothing Would be to Dig Our Own Graves: Student Activism in the Republic of Vietnam

During the Vietnam War, South Vietnamese students were some of the most vocal activists asserting multiple visions for Vietnam’s future. Students’ attitudes spanned the political spectrum from staunchly anti-Communist to supportive of the National Liberation Front. Like young people throughout the world in the 1960s, students in South Vietnam embodied the spirit of the global Sixties as a hopeful moment in which the possibility of freedom energized those demanding political change.

South Vietnam’s university students staged protests, wrote letters, and drew up plans of action that tried to unite the disparate political interests among the nation’s young people as politicians and generals in Saigon attempted to establish a viable national government. South Vietnamese government officials and U.S. advisors paid close attention to student activism hoping to identify and cultivate sources of support for the Saigon regime. While some students were willing to work with Americans, others argued that foreign intervention of any kind was bad for Vietnam. The Saigon government’s repressive tactics for dealing with political protest drove away students who otherwise might have supported it.

Which of the following best characterizes the diverse political attitudes among South Vietnamese students during the Vietnam War?

What is the equivalent expression for \left(5t\right)^{11}\times\left(7k\right)^{11} ?

Which of the following is/are the excluded value(s) of the given expression?

\frac{x-2}{x^2+5x+4}

Peppered moth evolution

The evolution of the peppered moth is an evolutionary instance of directional color change in the moth population as a consequence of air pollution during the Industrial Revolution. The frequency of dark-colored moths increased at that time, an example of industrial melanism.

Later, when pollution was reduced, the light-colored form again predominated. Industrial melanism in the peppered moth was an early test of Charles Darwin’s natural selection in action, and it remains a classic example in the teaching of evolution. In 1978, Sewall Wright described it as “the clearest case in which a conspicuous evolutionary process has actually been observed.”

The dark-colored or melanic form of the peppered moth (var. carbonaria) was rare, though a specimen had been collected by 1811. After field collection in 1848 from Manchester, an industrial city in England, the frequency of the variety was found to have increased drastically. By the end of the 19th century it almost completely outnumbered the original light-colored type (var. typica), with a record of 98% in 1895.

The evolutionary importance of the moth was only speculated upon during Darwin’s lifetime. It was 14 years after Darwin’s death, in 1896, that J. W. Tutt presented it as a case of natural selection. Because of this, the idea spread widely, and more people came to believe in Darwin’s theory.

Given the example of the peppered moth’s adaptation during the industrial revolution, which experimental approach would be best to investigate and further understand the mechanisms behind this adaptation?

A group of students is investigating the efficiency of different household appliances in converting electrical energy to useful work. They selected four appliances: a refrigerator, a washing machine, a microwave oven, and a ceiling fan. Each appliance was plugged into a power meter to measure the electrical energy consumption over a week of typical use. The students then calculated the amount of useful work done by each appliance during that week.

Here is a table illustrating the results for the experiment:

Which modification to their experiment design would likely help reduce potential sources of error?

I. Running each appliance for the same duration each day to standardize the measurement of electrical energy consumption.
II. Including a fifth appliance, such as a toaster or a vacuum cleaner, to compare a wider range of energy conversions.
III. Measuring the temperature changes in the surroundings of each appliance to understand their heat dissipation.
IV. Using different types of electrical outlets for each appliance to assess potential variations in power supply.

A farmer wants to construct a triangular field for planting crops. The total length of the fencing he has is 50 meters. The farmer knows that the area suitable for planting the crops should be 60 square meters as shown below. What is the height of the triangular field?

The Dust Bowl

Between 1930 and 1940, the southwestern Great Plains region of the United States suffered a severe drought. Once a semi-arid grassland, the treeless plains became home to thousands of settlers when, in 1862, Congress passed the Homestead Act. Most of the settlers farmed their land or grazed cattle. The farmers plowed the prairie grasses and planted dry land wheat. As the demand for wheat products grew, cattle grazing was reduced, and millions more acres were plowed and planted.

Dry land farming on the Great Plains led to the systematic destruction of the prairie grasses. In the ranching regions, overgrazing also destroyed large areas of grassland. Gradually, the land was laid bare, and significant environmental damage began to occur. Among the natural elements, the strong winds of the region were particularly devastating.

With the onset of drought in 1930, the overfarmed and overgrazed land began to blow away. Winds whipped across the plains, raising billowing clouds of dust. The sky could darken for days, and even well-sealed homes could have a thick layer of dust on the furniture. In some places, the dust drifted like snow, covering farm buildings and houses. Nineteen states in the heartland of the United States became a vast dust bowl. With no chance of making a living, farm families abandoned their homes and land, fleeing westward to become migrant laborers.

In his 1939 book The Grapes of Wrath, author John Steinbeck described the flight of families from the Dust Bowl: “And then the dispossessed were drawn west–from Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico; from Nevada and Arkansas, families, tribes, dusted out, tractored out. Car-loads, caravans, homeless and hungry; twenty thousand and fifty thousand and a hundred thousand and two hundred thousand. They streamed over the mountains, hungry and restless–restless as ants, scurrying to find work to do–to lift, to push, to pick, to cut–anything, any burden to bear, for food. The kids are hungry. We got no place to live. Like ants scurrying for work, for food, and most of all for land.” In all, 400,000 people left the Great Plains, victims of the combined action of severe drought and poor soil conservation practices.

Which of the following statements from the passage best illustrates possible bias or propaganda?

Types of Cases Heard

Based on the information above, select all of the following instances that the federal court system would be involved.