Unit 1 Progress Check
The fact that citizens directly elect members of the House of Representatives demonstrates that they have given their approval to the government.
A bicameral legislature with an upper house representing each state equally and a lower house with representation proportional to each state's population Congress is a two-house structure, with representation in one house proportional to each state's population and representation in the other house equal for every state.
While [opponents of the Constitution] admit that the government of the United States is destitute of energy, they contend against conferring upon it those powers which are requisite to supply that energy. They seem still to aim at things repugnant and irreconcilable; at an augmentation of federal authority, without a diminution of State authority; at sovereignty in the Union, and complete independence in the members. . . . This [requires that] a full display of the principal defects of the Confederation [is] necessary, in order to show that the evils we experience do not proceed from minute or partial imperfections, but from fundamental errors in the structure of the building, which cannot be amended otherwise than by an alteration in the first principles and main pillars of the fabric. . . . [T]he United States has an indefinite discretion to [plead for] for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either, by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America. The consequence of this is, that though in theory their resolutions concerning those objects are laws, constitutionally binding on the members of the Union, yet in practice they are mere recommendations which the States observe or disregard at their option. Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist 15 Which of the following excerpts from Article I of the United States Constitution resolves a problem described by the author?
"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;" Article I, Section 8 gives clear authority to Congress to lay and collect taxes.
In The Federalist 10, which of the following did James Madison argue would best control the negative effects of factions?
A large federal republic Madison argued that a large federal republic would mitigate the mischief of factions.
Which of the following statements accurately describes the majority opinion of the Supreme Court in United States v. Lopez (1995) ?
Congress may not use the commerce clause to make possession of a gun in a school zone a federal crime. The Supreme Court ruled that the commerce clause was limited in its use to expand federal power, which resulted in temporarily preserving state police power.
As a compromise, the framers agreed on a bicameral legislature, with the House of Representatives elected by popular vote within states and the Senate selected by state legislatures. The direct election method conforms most to which of the following democratic ideals?
Government should be based on the consent of the governed. The fact that citizens directly elect members of the House of Representatives demonstrates that they have given their approval to the government.
Which of the following cases expanded the powers of Congress by defining the necessary and proper clause more broadly?
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) This case allowed Congress to create the Bank of the United States as an implied power.
The Declaration of Independence cites specific reasons for separating from British rule, including the British imposing taxes and maintaining a standing army without consent. Which of the following principles or ideas would these grievances be most related to?
Natural rights such as life, liberty, and property Under the theory of natural rights, the colonists were being deprived of their liberty and property by a British government that did not allow them to have representation.
In the 1950s Southern states attempted to prevent integration of their public schools. In return, the National Guard was sent to force states to implement federal regulations. This scenario illustrates which of the following about the relationship between the state and national governments?
The debate over the role of the central government and state powers is ongoing. States throughout history have challenged the authority of the national government in their decision making, and segregation was an example of that ongoing debate.
"In every free government, the people must give their assent to the laws by which they are governed. This is the true criterion between a free government and an arbitrary one. The former are ruled by the will of the whole, expressed in any manner they may agree upon; the latter by the will of one, or a few. If the people are to give their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen, must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few. Now, in a large extended country, it is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people, without having it so numerous and unwieldy, as to be subject in great measure to the inconveniency of a democratic government...." Brutus 1 Which of the following excerpts from the passage best describes the author's reason for opposing an expansion of the scope of the federal government?
"... [I]t is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people, without having it so numerous and unwieldy, as to be subject in great measure to the inconveniency of a democratic government." This excerpt contains the author's reasoning for opposing an extended republic, arguing that any fair representative body truly representing the people's will would be too large to function.
Which of the following best characterizes the general argument made in Brutus 1?
A large republic is dangerous to personal liberty and undermines the states. Brutus 1 argued that a large republic is dangerous to personal liberty because the federal government would usurp too much power.
Which of the following is an accurate summary of James Madison's argument in The Federalist 10?
A large republic presents more opportunities for groups to participate, compete, and limit each other. Madison advocates for a large republic because power will be dispersed and the dangers of factions will be mitigated.
Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution lists several powers that are denied to the federal government, such as granting titles of nobility and passing ex post facto laws. This best demonstrates which of the following ideals of democracy?
Limited Government Limited government is demonstrated in this example because denying powers to the federal government limits it.
"In every free government, the people must give their assent to the laws by which they are governed. This is the true criterion between a free government and an arbitrary one. The former are ruled by the will of the whole, expressed in any manner they may agree upon; the latter by the will of one, or a few. If the people are to give their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen, must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few. Now, in a large extended country, it is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people, without having it so numerous and unwieldy, as to be subject in great measure to the inconveniency of a democratic government...." Brutus 1 Which of the following statements would the author of the passage most likely agree with?
Nations with extended territory cannot fairly represent their citizens in a republican form of government. In the passage, Brutus rejects the idea of a republic in which representatives vote on behalf of citizens, arguing that in a large country, it is impossible to fairly represent the will of the people with a small number of legislators.
"In every free government, the people must give their assent to the laws by which they are governed. This is the true criterion between a free government and an arbitrary one. The former are ruled by the will of the whole, expressed in any manner they may agree upon; the latter by the will of one, or a few. If the people are to give their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen, must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few. Now, in a large extended country, it is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people, without having it so numerous and unwieldy, as to be subject in great measure to the inconveniency of a democratic government...." Brutus 1 In the passage, Brutus is most concerned with the conflict between which of the following political ideas?
Participatory democracy and elite democracy In the passage, Brutus discusses two systems of representation, arguing that while elite democracy cannot adequately express the popular will, participatory democracy could lead to a large, unwieldy government that is unable to function.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the separation of powers is integral to the Constitution not to preserve the prerogatives of each branch of government but to divide governmental powers among the branches so as to keep power diffused—and thereby limited and protective of personal freedom. . . . Thus, even if one branch of government consented to ceding an essential power to another branch, such a giveaway would be unconstitutional. . . . Can the president legally use military force to attack a foreign land without a serious threat or legal obligation or a declaration of war from Congress? In a word: No. Here is the back story. . . . . . . [A] bipartisan group of senators offered legislation supported by the president that . . . would permit a president to strike whomever and wherever he pleases. The president would be restrained only by a vote of Congress—after hostilities have commenced. Such a statute would give the president far more powers than he has now, would directly violate Congress' war-making powers by ceding them away to the president, would defy the Supreme Court on the unconstitutionality of giving away core governmental functions, would commit the U.S. to foreign wars without congressional and thus popular support, and would invite dangerous mischief by any president wanting to attack any enemy—real or imagined, old or new—for foreign or domestic political purposes, whether American interests are at stake or not. Andrew Napolitano, "At War with the Separation of Powers," The Washington Times, 2018. Which of the following principles of government is most related to the author's argument in the passage?
Separation of powers is necessary to our constitutional system to limit the power of the three branches and guarantee limited government. The author explains in the passage that the Supreme Court rulings have determined that the separation of powers exists to limit the power of each of the three branches, making sure each sticks to its constitutionally defined role in order to ensure limited government.
While [opponents of the Constitution] admit that the government of the United States is destitute of energy, they contend against conferring upon it those powers which are requisite to supply that energy. They seem still to aim at things repugnant and irreconcilable; at an augmentation of federal authority, without a diminution of State authority; at sovereignty in the Union, and complete independence in the members. . . . This [requires that] a full display of the principal defects of the Confederation [is] necessary, in order to show that the evils we experience do not proceed from minute or partial imperfections, but from fundamental errors in the structure of the building, which cannot be amended otherwise than by an alteration in the first principles and main pillars of the fabric. . . . [T]he United States has an indefinite discretion to [plead for] for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either, by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America. The consequence of this is, that though in theory their resolutions concerning those objects are laws, constitutionally binding on the members of the Union, yet in practice they are mere recommendations which the States observe or disregard at their option. Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist 15 Which of the following is a difference between the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution that is a response to a problem expressed in the passage?
The Articles of Confederation allowed for the federal government to request revenues from states but did not permit it to tax citizens directly, whereas under the United States Constitution the federal government could tax citizens directly. The author of the passage considers the lack of taxation to be a fundamental problem, so the power to tax was added to Article I, Section 8 to the Constitution in response.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the separation of powers is integral to the Constitution not to preserve the prerogatives of each branch of government but to divide governmental powers among the branches so as to keep power diffused—and thereby limited and protective of personal freedom. . . . Thus, even if one branch of government consented to ceding an essential power to another branch, such a giveaway would be unconstitutional. . . . Can the president legally use military force to attack a foreign land without a serious threat or legal obligation or a declaration of war from Congress? In a word: No. Here is the back story. . . . . . . [A] bipartisan group of senators offered legislation supported by the president that . . . would permit a president to strike whomever and wherever he pleases. The president would be restrained only by a vote of Congress—after hostilities have commenced. Such a statute would give the president far more powers than he has now, would directly violate Congress' war-making powers by ceding them away to the president, would defy the Supreme Court on the unconstitutionality of giving away core governmental functions, would commit the U.S. to foreign wars without congressional and thus popular support, and would invite dangerous mischief by any president wanting to attack any enemy—real or imagined, old or new—for foreign or domestic political purposes, whether American interests are at stake or not. Andrew Napolitano, "At War with the Separation of Powers," The Washington Times, 2018. Which of the following political processes would best solve the problem regarding the system of checks and balances, as articulated by the author in the passage?
The Supreme Court rules on a suit brought by an interest group that legislation permitting the president to launch military strikes without congressional approval is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruling that legislation permitting the president to launch military attacks without congressional approval is unconstitutional solves the problem using the system of checks and balances.
While [opponents of the Constitution] admit that the government of the United States is destitute of energy, they contend against conferring upon it those powers which are requisite to supply that energy. They seem still to aim at things repugnant and irreconcilable; at an augmentation of federal authority, without a diminution of State authority; at sovereignty in the Union, and complete independence in the members. . . . This [requires that] a full display of the principal defects of the Confederation [is] necessary, in order to show that the evils we experience do not proceed from minute or partial imperfections, but from fundamental errors in the structure of the building, which cannot be amended otherwise than by an alteration in the first principles and main pillars of the fabric. . . . [T]he United States has an indefinite discretion to [plead for] for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either, by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America. The consequence of this is, that though in theory their resolutions concerning those objects are laws, constitutionally binding on the members of the Union, yet in practice they are mere recommendations which the States observe or disregard at their option. Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist 15 Which of the following experiences most likely influenced the perspective conveyed in the passage?
The debt crisis of the 1780s which the national government was unable to address due to lack of authority The debt crisis was not effectively resolved by state governments, while the federal government was unable to act because of a lack of taxation power under the Articles of Confederation.
The Gun-Free School Zones Act made it illegal for individuals knowingly to carry a gun in a school zone. The Supreme Court determined this act to be an unconstitutional stretch of the commerce clause in
United States v. Lopez (1995) The Lopez decision struck down the federal prohibition against bringing a gun to a school as an unconstitutional stretch of the commerce clause.
In order to appease both Federalists and Anti-Federalists, it was agreed at the Constitutional Convention that a group of delegates would be charged with selecting the president. This would ensure that
the most capable individuals would decide which candidate would be president The intention of the electoral college was to have a temporary mechanism in which a group of well-educated men selected the most qualified candidate for the presidency.