Poli 007 Spring 2015: U.S. Foreign Policy, Quiz #3
Choose the best answer! Don't stress, but don't fail either.
- 1.
Dissatisfied with the Administration's policy of "constructive engagement" and quiet diplomacy to bring an end to apartheid in South Africa, the House in 1983 approved legislation applying sanctions against South Africa as part of an extension of the Export Administration Act. What is this an example of?
- A.
Over-use and abuse of executive powers
- B.
Fast-track authority for treaties
- C.
Indirect legislative action and influence over FP
- D.
Legislative restrictions and pressure to shape FP
Correct Answer
D. Legislative restrictions and pressure to shape FPExplanation
This is an example of legislative restrictions and pressure to shape foreign policy. The House approved legislation to apply sanctions against South Africa, which indicates that the legislative branch is exerting its power to restrict and shape the administration's foreign policy. This demonstrates the influence of Congress in shaping the direction of foreign policy decisions.Rate this question:
-
- 2.
What function of Congress in foreign-policy making does this photo best demonstrate?
- A.
The power of the purse
- B.
Informal use of influence and consultations with foreign officials
- C.
Investigative committees
- D.
Declaring war or authorizing military force
Correct Answer
B. Informal use of influence and consultations with foreign officialsExplanation
This photo best demonstrates the function of Congress in foreign-policy making known as the informal use of influence and consultations with foreign officials. The image suggests that members of Congress are engaging in discussions and negotiations with foreign officials, indicating their role in shaping foreign policy through informal means. This function involves leveraging their influence and engaging in diplomatic efforts to influence foreign policy decisions.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
Which of the following is not an example of people looking after their institutional and individual interest (as opposed to national interest)?
- A.
Charlie Wilson wanting to please Joanne Herring using his position on the Defense Appropriations Committee
- B.
Wilson and others arguing that the U.S. needs to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan to stop the USSR's expansion
- C.
The other Congressman's speech at the refugee camp
- D.
The CIA station chief in Islamabad rejecting Wilson's plan
Correct Answer
B. Wilson and others arguing that the U.S. needs to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan to stop the USSR's expansionExplanation
The correct answer is Wilson and others arguing that the U.S. needs to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan to stop the USSR's expansion. This is not an example of people looking after their institutional and individual interest because their argument is based on national interest. They believe that defeating the Soviets in Afghanistan is necessary to protect the interests of the United States and prevent the USSR's expansion.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
Read this passage from one of your readings and then choose the statement below that is the most true:"It used to be argued, before presidents stopped even bothering to argue the point, that the congressional war power was outmoded in a century when the war was likely to start with a surprise attack. The Russians could obliterate 20 American cities in the time it took for Sen. Slowbrain to conclude his opening remarks at the first of half a dozen hearings. But constitutional provisions don't disappear just because they seem outmoded, and in this case, the provision is not even outmoded. As it has turned out, the characteristic American war of the 21st century is perfectly suited to the constitutional requirements."
- A.
This author opposes the War Powers Act/Resolution
- B.
This author is arguing that while the constitutional powers granted to Congress to declare war made a lot of sense during the Cold War, when there was a chance of an attack on US soil, they make little sense in an age of terror.
- C.
This author is arguing that most wars today are wars of choice, or more specifically military interventions in foreign conflicts where there is more than enough time to consult Congress
- D.
The author argues that the president does possess power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
Correct Answer
C. This author is arguing that most wars today are wars of choice, or more specifically military interventions in foreign conflicts where there is more than enough time to consult CongressExplanation
The passage suggests that the characteristic American war of the 21st century is perfectly suited to the constitutional requirements. This implies that the author believes that the constitutional powers granted to Congress to declare war are still relevant and applicable in the current age, contradicting the idea that they are outmoded. The author argues that most wars today are wars of choice, or military interventions in foreign conflicts, where there is sufficient time to consult Congress. Therefore, the correct answer is that the author is arguing that most wars today are wars of choice or military interventions in foreign conflicts where there is more than enough time to consult Congress.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
Critics of the War Powers Resolution find all of the following problems with it except:
- A.
Vague consultation requirements
- B.
Congress has failed to seize the powers given to it in the WPR
- C.
The WPR does not attempt in the least to rein in POTUS powers
- D.
Successive POTUSes have basically ignored it
Correct Answer
C. The WPR does not attempt in the least to rein in POTUS powersExplanation
The critics of the War Powers Resolution find several problems with it, including vague consultation requirements, Congress's failure to seize the powers given to it in the WPR, and the fact that successive POTUSes have basically ignored it. However, the correct answer states that the WPR does not attempt to rein in POTUS powers, suggesting that this is not a problem that critics have identified with the resolution.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
According to one of the op-ed articles you read (the one by David Ignatius), many ambassadorial posts remain unfulfilled due to:
- A.
Congress exercising its power of confirmation of executive appointments
- B.
The fact that Congress is unwilling to rein in a president when it comes to matters of national security
- C.
Congress exercising is power of the purse
- D.
POTUS using executive agreements
Correct Answer
A. Congress exercising its power of confirmation of executive appointmentsExplanation
The correct answer is that many ambassadorial posts remain unfulfilled due to Congress exercising its power of confirmation of executive appointments. This means that Congress has the authority to approve or reject the appointments made by the President for ambassadorial positions. If Congress does not confirm these appointments, the posts remain vacant. This can lead to a shortage of ambassadors and hinder the effective functioning of diplomatic relations.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
The article you read on Egypt policy demonstrates which Congressional power over foreign policy?
- A.
Using power of the purse by attaching conditions to foreign aid
- B.
Using legislative veto to derail the President's agenda in Egypt
- C.
Using its power of confirmation of foreign ambassadors to make sure that Obama's choice for ambassador to Cairo is appropriate
- D.
Using its power to declare war to intervene in the lawless Sinai peninsula
Correct Answer
A. Using power of the purse by attaching conditions to foreign aidExplanation
The article on Egypt policy demonstrates the Congressional power over foreign policy by using the power of the purse. This means that Congress can attach conditions to foreign aid, giving them the ability to influence and shape the policies and actions of foreign countries, such as Egypt, by leveraging the funding they provide.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
Charlie Wilson exercises Congressional power of the purse through is membership in:
- A.
The CIA
- B.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
- C.
House defense appropriations subcommittee
- D.
Republican caucus called "Friends of Afghanistan"
Correct Answer
C. House defense appropriations subcommitteeExplanation
Charlie Wilson exercises Congressional power of the purse through his membership in the House defense appropriations subcommittee. This committee is responsible for making decisions regarding the allocation of funds for defense-related purposes. As a member of this committee, Wilson has the authority to influence the budgeting and spending decisions related to defense issues. This allows him to exercise his power of the purse, which refers to the control and allocation of financial resources by the legislative branch of government.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
Presidents had so much unconstrained leverage over foreign policy between 1955-1965 for all of the following reasons except:
- A.
Cold war consensus
- B.
Acquiescent congress
- C.
Antagonistic congress
- D.
Congressional oversight committees did not yet exist
Correct Answer
C. Antagonistic congressExplanation
During the period between 1955-1965, presidents had significant leverage over foreign policy due to several factors. The Cold War consensus allowed presidents to have broad support from both political parties and the public, enabling them to pursue their foreign policy goals effectively. An acquiescent Congress further enhanced presidential power as lawmakers were generally willing to defer to the president's decisions. Additionally, the absence of congressional oversight committees during this time meant that there were fewer checks on presidential authority. However, the one exception to these reasons is an antagonistic Congress. If Congress was actively opposing the president's foreign policy initiatives, it would limit the president's leverage and ability to shape foreign policy decisions.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on the Vietnam War in the late 1960s and early 1970s contributed to public opinion against continued U.S. participation in the war. In this instance, Congress shaped USFP through:
- A.
Its power of the purse
- B.
Anticipated reactions
- C.
Reporting requirements as a form of oversight
- D.
Hearings as a form of oversight
Correct Answer
D. Hearings as a form of oversightExplanation
The correct answer is "hearings as a form of oversight." Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on the Vietnam War allowed for public discussion and examination of the war's progress and impact. These hearings provided a platform for experts, military officials, and anti-war activists to present their views and arguments, leading to increased public scrutiny and skepticism towards the war. As a result, these hearings played a significant role in shaping public opinion against continued U.S. participation in the war.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Mar 18, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Oct 06, 2014Quiz Created by
Mietek
Back to top