Chapter 19 - Foreign And Military Policy Reading Quiz #1
-
The majoritarian component of foreign policy includes those decisions that
-
Narrowly distribute benefits and cost.
-
Narrowly distribute benefits and widely distribute cost.
-
Widely distribute benefits and cost.
-
Widely distribute benefits and narrowly distribute cost.
-
None of the above is true.
-
This quiz assesses knowledge on U. S. Foreign and military policy, covering constitutional powers, majoritarian aspects, and historical decisions like the relocation of Japanese Americans during WWII. It's designed to enhance understanding of government actions in international and military contexts.
(184).webp "Chapter 19 - Foreign And Military Policy Reading Quiz #1 - Quiz")
Quiz Preview
- 2.
The constitutional power to declare war and to regulate commerce with other nations is vested in
-
The State Department.
-
The Senate.
-
The president.
-
The Pentagon.
-
Congress.
Correct Answer
A. Congress.Explanation
The correct answer is Congress. The Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war and regulate commerce with other nations. This power is not vested in the State Department, the Senate, the president, or the Pentagon. The State Department is responsible for diplomacy and foreign relations, the Senate plays a role in approving treaties and appointments, the president is the commander-in-chief but does not have the sole power to declare war, and the Pentagon is the headquarters of the Department of Defense. Ultimately, the authority to declare war and regulate commerce lies with Congress.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
When legal issues have arisen out of foreign policy disputes between the president and Congress, the Supreme Court has generally
-
Favored Congress.
-
Favored the president.
-
Refused to intervene.
-
Interpreted the U.S. Constitution quite literally.
-
Relied on the solicitor general to resolve conflicts.
Correct Answer
A. Refused to intervene.Explanation
In cases where legal issues have emerged from foreign policy disputes between the president and Congress, the Supreme Court has typically chosen not to get involved. Rather than taking sides or favoring either branch of government, the Court has refused to intervene, allowing the political branches to resolve their conflicts through their own processes. This approach preserves the separation of powers and avoids potential overreach by the judiciary in matters of foreign policy.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
President _______________ ordered the military to move Japanese Americans from their homes on the West Coast to "relocation centers."
-
Franklin Roosevelt
-
Harry Truman
-
Woodrow Wilson
-
Warren G. Harding
-
Abraham Lincoln
Correct Answer
A. Franklin RooseveltExplanation
During World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, which authorized the forced removal and internment of Japanese Americans living on the West Coast. This decision was based on fears of Japanese espionage and sabotage following the attack on Pearl Harbor. Over 120,000 Japanese Americans, the majority of whom were U.S. citizens, were relocated to internment camps in remote areas. The order has since been widely criticized as a violation of civil liberties and racial discrimination.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
When legal challenges were brought in regard to the executive order that Japanese Americans on the West Coast be sent to "relocation centers",
-
The courts refused to entertain the cases.
-
District courts struck down the relocations, but they were upheld on appeal.
-
District courts declared the relocations unconstitutional.
-
The U.S. Supreme Court declared the relocations constitutional.
-
The U.S. Supreme Court declared the relocations unconstitutional.
Correct Answer
A. The U.S. Supreme Court declared the relocations constitutional.Explanation
The correct answer is that the U.S. Supreme Court declared the relocations constitutional. This means that when legal challenges were brought regarding the executive order to relocate Japanese Americans on the West Coast to "relocation centers," the Supreme Court ruled that the relocations were constitutional and therefore valid.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
The War Powers Act of 1973 was passed
-
With huge support of Congress and the president.
-
Because the president supported it.
-
To strengthen the power of the president.
-
Over a presidential veto.
-
Due to military overreach in the Middle East.
Correct Answer
A. Over a presidential veto.Explanation
The correct answer is "over a presidential veto." This means that the War Powers Act of 1973 was passed despite the president's objection. It suggests that there was significant disagreement between the president and Congress regarding this act, but Congress was able to gather enough support to override the president's veto and pass the act into law.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
The War Powers Act of 1973 mandates that
-
The president must report in writing to Congress within 48 hours after he introduces U.S. troops into areas where hostilities have occurred or are imminent.
-
Within 60 days after troops are sent into hostile situations, Congress must, by declaration of war or other specific statutory authorization, provide for the continuation of hostile action by U.S. troops.
-
If Congress does not authorize the use of force, the president must withdraw the troops.
-
If Congress requires the removal of troops, the president must comply.
-
All of the above are true.
Correct Answer
A. All of the above are true.Explanation
The War Powers Act of 1973 sets specific requirements for the president's actions regarding the use of U.S. troops in hostilities. According to the act, the president must report to Congress within 48 hours after introducing troops into areas of hostilities or imminent hostilities. Additionally, if troops are sent into hostile situations, Congress must provide authorization within 60 days for the continuation of hostile action. If Congress does not authorize the use of force, the president must withdraw the troops. Furthermore, if Congress demands the removal of troops, the president must comply. Therefore, all of the statements mentioned in the options are true based on the provisions of the War Powers Act.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
Presidents have viewed the War Powers Act as
-
Being unconstitutional.
-
Being a legitimate use of congressional power.
-
Helping America's image abroad.
-
Strengthening their power in foreign affairs.
-
None of the above is true.
Correct Answer
A. Being unconstitutional.Explanation
The correct answer is "being unconstitutional." The War Powers Act is seen as unconstitutional by presidents because it places limits on their power to engage in military actions without congressional approval. The act requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and prohibits armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days without congressional authorization. Presidents argue that this infringes upon their constitutional authority as commander-in-chief and undermines their ability to respond swiftly to national security threats.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
Which of the following statements about congressional oversight of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) covert activities is true?
-
Congress has no authority to disapprove of such activities.
-
Congress must approve of activities that involve political assassination.
-
Congress must approve of activities that involve military expenditures.
-
Congress has blanket authority to approve or disapprove of such activities.
-
Congress must approve those activities that will extend more than sixty days.
Correct Answer
A. Congress has no authority to disapprove of such activities.Explanation
Congress has no authority to disapprove of CIA covert activities. This means that Congress does not have the power to reject or prevent such activities from taking place. This suggests that the CIA has a certain level of autonomy and can carry out covert operations without direct oversight or approval from Congress.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
In the early years of the republic, foreign policy was often made and almost always carried out by
-
The president.
-
Congress.
-
The secretary of state.
-
The U.S. Senate.
-
The Speaker of the House.
Correct Answer
A. The secretary of state.Explanation
In the early years of the republic, foreign policy was often made and almost always carried out by the secretary of state. This position held significant influence over the nation's international relations and was responsible for negotiating treaties, managing diplomatic relations, and representing the country abroad. The president would typically rely on the expertise and advice of the secretary of state in matters of foreign policy. Congress, the U.S. Senate, and the Speaker of the House played important roles in domestic affairs and legislation, but they did not have the same level of authority or responsibility in shaping and implementing foreign policy.Rate this question:
-
- 11.
The National Security Council includes all of the following EXCEPT the
-
Speaker of the House.
-
President.
-
Vice president.
-
Secretary of state.
-
Secretary of defense.
Correct Answer
A. Speaker of the House.Explanation
The National Security Council is a government organization responsible for advising and assisting the president on matters of national security. It includes the president, vice president, secretary of state, and secretary of defense. The Speaker of the House, however, is not a member of the National Security Council. The Speaker of the House is a position within the legislative branch of government and does not have a direct role in national security decision-making.Rate this question:
-
- 12.
In this decision, the Supreme Court ruled that sending Japanese Americans to relocation centers during World War II was based on an acceptable military justification.
-
Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. v. United States
-
Korematsu v. United States
-
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer
-
Hamdi v. Ryumsfeld
-
Rasul v. Bush
Correct Answer
A. Korematsu v. United StatesExplanation
During World War II, the United States government ordered the relocation of Japanese Americans to internment camps due to concerns about national security. In Korematsu v. United States, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of this decision, stating that it was based on a military justification. The court argued that the need to protect against potential espionage and sabotage outweighed the individual rights of Japanese Americans. This decision has been widely criticized as a violation of civil liberties and has since been overturned.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Apr 5, 2024 +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Apr 05, 2024Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Mar 24, 2016Quiz Created by
Catherine Halcomb
Back to top