The 1912 Tariff Debate
The passage and political cartoons provide information about the 1912 tariff debate.
1 The election of 1912, Eke many elections, was a contest of ideas. The four candidates for president had very different views on the role of government. These differences were clearly evident in the candidates' position on tariffs – taxes charged on imported goods. Democrat Woodrow Wilson argued that the economic role of the federal government should be limited. He supported reducing tariffs to decrease government involvement in the economy. Republican William Taft argued that the federal government had an obligation to protect American businesses and workers. A high tariff would limit competition from foreign companies and would, therefore, benefit American businesses. The Progressive candidate, Theodore Roosevelt, tock a more moderate view. He believed that the government should control and supervise the economy. But he argued against a blanket tariff on all
As president, what power did Woodrow Wilson have to prevent Congress from raising tariffs?
- A. The power to appoint officials
- B. The power to enforce the law
- C. The power to make treaties
- D. The power to veto bills
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D
Woodrow Wilson's ability to prevent Congress from raising tariffs stemmed from his power to veto bills. This authority allowed him to reject legislation that he deemed unfavorable, including tariff increases. Option A, the power to appoint officials, does not directly influence tariff legislation. Option B, the power to enforce the law, pertains to executing laws rather than preventing their passage. Option C, the power to make treaties, relates to international agreements and has no bearing on domestic tariff policies. Thus, the veto power was the key tool Wilson could use to block tariff increases.
Woodrow Wilson's ability to prevent Congress from raising tariffs stemmed from his power to veto bills. This authority allowed him to reject legislation that he deemed unfavorable, including tariff increases. Option A, the power to appoint officials, does not directly influence tariff legislation. Option B, the power to enforce the law, pertains to executing laws rather than preventing their passage. Option C, the power to make treaties, relates to international agreements and has no bearing on domestic tariff policies. Thus, the veto power was the key tool Wilson could use to block tariff increases.
Other Related Questions
When is a government most likely to establish a wage floor?
- A. When wages have consistently increased over a long period of time
- B. When wages have remained constant over a long period of time
- C. When it determines wages are too low
- D. When it determines wages are too high
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: C
A wage floor, often implemented through minimum wage laws, is typically established when the government identifies that wages are too low, leading to insufficient income for workers. Option A is incorrect because a consistent increase in wages does not necessitate a wage floor; it may indicate a healthy economy. Option B is also wrong, as constant wages may not reflect a need for intervention unless they are deemed inadequate. Option D misinterprets the purpose of a wage floor; it is not set when wages are high, but rather to protect workers from unlivable pay levels. Thus, the rationale for a wage floor centers on addressing low wages.
A wage floor, often implemented through minimum wage laws, is typically established when the government identifies that wages are too low, leading to insufficient income for workers. Option A is incorrect because a consistent increase in wages does not necessitate a wage floor; it may indicate a healthy economy. Option B is also wrong, as constant wages may not reflect a need for intervention unless they are deemed inadequate. Option D misinterprets the purpose of a wage floor; it is not set when wages are high, but rather to protect workers from unlivable pay levels. Thus, the rationale for a wage floor centers on addressing low wages.
Which statement best describes a key aspect of the trade relationship between Grand Coast and Toland?
- A. Grand Coast has the advantage in both timber and fish.
- B. Toland has the comparative advantage in fish.
- C. Toland can produce timber at a lower opportunity cost than Grand Coast.
- D. Grand Coast can produce fish at a lower opportunity cost than Toland.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D
In the context of trade relationships, opportunity cost is crucial. Grand Coast can produce fish at a lower opportunity cost than Toland, meaning it sacrifices less in terms of other goods when producing fish. This advantage allows Grand Coast to specialize in fish production, leading to more efficient trade. Option A is incorrect as it suggests Grand Coast has the advantage in both timber and fish, which is unlikely in a comparative advantage scenario. Option B misstates the comparative advantage, assigning it to Toland for fish, which contradicts the opportunity cost analysis. Option C incorrectly asserts that Toland has a lower opportunity cost for timber, which is not supported by the information provided.
In the context of trade relationships, opportunity cost is crucial. Grand Coast can produce fish at a lower opportunity cost than Toland, meaning it sacrifices less in terms of other goods when producing fish. This advantage allows Grand Coast to specialize in fish production, leading to more efficient trade. Option A is incorrect as it suggests Grand Coast has the advantage in both timber and fish, which is unlikely in a comparative advantage scenario. Option B misstates the comparative advantage, assigning it to Toland for fish, which contradicts the opportunity cost analysis. Option C incorrectly asserts that Toland has a lower opportunity cost for timber, which is not supported by the information provided.
In Grand Coast, what is the opportunity cost of one unit of fish?
- A. ½ unit of timber
- B. 5 units of timber
- C. 2 units of fish
- D. 8 units of fish
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
Opportunity cost refers to the value of the next best alternative that is forgone when making a choice. In Grand Coast, if one unit of fish is produced, the opportunity cost is the amount of timber that could have been produced instead. Option A, ½ unit of timber, accurately reflects this trade-off, indicating that for each unit of fish, only half a unit of timber is sacrificed. Option B, 5 units of timber, overestimates the sacrifice, suggesting a much higher cost than what is actually incurred. Option C, 2 units of fish, misinterprets the concept, as it implies a cost in the same product rather than in timber. Option D, 8 units of fish, also incorrectly suggests a loss of the same good, failing to recognize the opportunity cost in terms of timber.
Opportunity cost refers to the value of the next best alternative that is forgone when making a choice. In Grand Coast, if one unit of fish is produced, the opportunity cost is the amount of timber that could have been produced instead. Option A, ½ unit of timber, accurately reflects this trade-off, indicating that for each unit of fish, only half a unit of timber is sacrificed. Option B, 5 units of timber, overestimates the sacrifice, suggesting a much higher cost than what is actually incurred. Option C, 2 units of fish, misinterprets the concept, as it implies a cost in the same product rather than in timber. Option D, 8 units of fish, also incorrectly suggests a loss of the same good, failing to recognize the opportunity cost in terms of timber.
Assume that the state of Kansas passed a law limiting the number of hours teenagers could work on farms, and the state's farmers challenged the law. The decision in which of these cases could be cited in support of Kansas's law?
- A. Commonwealth v. Hunt
- B. Muller v. Oregon
- C. Brown v. Board of Education
- D. Engel v. Vitale
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
Muller v. Oregon upheld the state's ability to regulate working hours for women, emphasizing the government's role in protecting public welfare. This precedent supports Kansas's law limiting teenage work hours on farms, as it aligns with the principle of safeguarding minors' health and well-being. Commonwealth v. Hunt dealt with labor unions and the right to organize, which does not pertain to youth labor regulations. Brown v. Board of Education focused on desegregation in schools, irrelevant to labor laws. Engel v. Vitale addressed school prayer, having no connection to employment issues. Thus, only Muller v. Oregon directly supports the rationale for Kansas's law.
Muller v. Oregon upheld the state's ability to regulate working hours for women, emphasizing the government's role in protecting public welfare. This precedent supports Kansas's law limiting teenage work hours on farms, as it aligns with the principle of safeguarding minors' health and well-being. Commonwealth v. Hunt dealt with labor unions and the right to organize, which does not pertain to youth labor regulations. Brown v. Board of Education focused on desegregation in schools, irrelevant to labor laws. Engel v. Vitale addressed school prayer, having no connection to employment issues. Thus, only Muller v. Oregon directly supports the rationale for Kansas's law.