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
In Cartoon 2, the two-faced figure attempts to convince American laborers to support tariffs by appealing to their
- A. fear that foreign workers would work for lower wages.
- B. desire to prove that American-made products were superior to products made by foreign workers.
- C. fear that foreign workers would bring radical political ideas.
- D. desire to share the American standard of living with foreign workers.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
The two-faced figure in Cartoon 2 appeals to American laborers' fear that foreign workers would work for lower wages, which threatens their job security and income. This fear is a powerful motivator for supporting tariffs, as it aims to protect domestic jobs from cheaper foreign labor. Option B, while highlighting a desire for quality, does not directly address the immediate economic concern of job security. Option C introduces a political fear, but the cartoon focuses more on economic implications. Option D suggests a sense of altruism, which contrasts with the self-interest driving laborers' decisions regarding tariffs.
The two-faced figure in Cartoon 2 appeals to American laborers' fear that foreign workers would work for lower wages, which threatens their job security and income. This fear is a powerful motivator for supporting tariffs, as it aims to protect domestic jobs from cheaper foreign labor. Option B, while highlighting a desire for quality, does not directly address the immediate economic concern of job security. Option C introduces a political fear, but the cartoon focuses more on economic implications. Option D suggests a sense of altruism, which contrasts with the self-interest driving laborers' decisions regarding tariffs.
Other Related Questions
What is the effect of a debit on a person's checking account?
- A. The account's balance increases.
- B. The account's balance decreases.
- C. The account's interest rate increases.
- D. The account's interest rate decreases.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
A debit reduces the available funds in a checking account, leading to a decrease in the account's balance. Therefore, option B accurately reflects this effect. Option A is incorrect since a debit cannot increase the balance; it signifies money being spent or withdrawn. Options C and D relate to interest rates, which are unaffected by debit transactions in a checking account. Interest rates typically depend on the account type and bank policies, not on individual transactions like debits. Hence, they do not apply to the effect of a debit on the account balance.
A debit reduces the available funds in a checking account, leading to a decrease in the account's balance. Therefore, option B accurately reflects this effect. Option A is incorrect since a debit cannot increase the balance; it signifies money being spent or withdrawn. Options C and D relate to interest rates, which are unaffected by debit transactions in a checking account. Interest rates typically depend on the account type and bank policies, not on individual transactions like debits. Hence, they do not apply to the effect of a debit on the account balance.
Which of these statements best describes the difference between Commonwealth v. Hunt and Muller v. Oregon?
- A. Commonwealth v. Hunt is relevant only to education cases, while Muller v. Oregon is relevant only to issues of labor relations.
- B. Commonwealth v. Hunt is relevant only to labor issues, while Muller v. Oregon is relevant only to free speech issues.
- C. Both cases deal with labor issues; Commonwealth v. Hunt allows the existence of labor unions, while Muller v. Oregon gives businesses the right to challenge unions' demands.
- D. Both cases deal with labor cases; Commonwealth v. Hunt allows the existence of labor unions, while Muller v. Oregon supports state regulation of working hours for women.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D
Both cases address labor issues but focus on different aspects. Commonwealth v. Hunt established that labor unions are legal and can organize, promoting workers' rights. In contrast, Muller v. Oregon upheld state regulations on women's working hours, emphasizing the government's role in protecting workers' welfare. Option A incorrectly limits Commonwealth v. Hunt to education cases, while B misrepresents both cases by suggesting they only concern labor and free speech issues. Option C inaccurately implies that Muller v. Oregon allows businesses to challenge unions, which is not its focus.
Both cases address labor issues but focus on different aspects. Commonwealth v. Hunt established that labor unions are legal and can organize, promoting workers' rights. In contrast, Muller v. Oregon upheld state regulations on women's working hours, emphasizing the government's role in protecting workers' welfare. Option A incorrectly limits Commonwealth v. Hunt to education cases, while B misrepresents both cases by suggesting they only concern labor and free speech issues. Option C inaccurately implies that Muller v. Oregon allows businesses to challenge unions, which is not its focus.
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.
What was the impact of the Brandenburg v. Ohio ruling on an individual's right to freedom of speech?
- A. It allowed for more freedom.
- B. It created further restrictions.
- C. It had no effect on free speech issues.
- D. It created a special class of speech regarding racial issues.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
The Brandenburg v. Ohio ruling significantly expanded individual rights to freedom of speech by establishing the "imminent lawless action" standard. This meant that speech could only be restricted if it incited immediate illegal activity, thereby allowing for more robust expression of ideas, even controversial ones. Option B is incorrect as the ruling lessened restrictions on speech rather than increasing them. Option C misrepresents the ruling's significance; it directly influenced free speech protections. Option D is also inaccurate, as the ruling did not create a special class of speech but rather reinforced protections for all forms of expression.
The Brandenburg v. Ohio ruling significantly expanded individual rights to freedom of speech by establishing the "imminent lawless action" standard. This meant that speech could only be restricted if it incited immediate illegal activity, thereby allowing for more robust expression of ideas, even controversial ones. Option B is incorrect as the ruling lessened restrictions on speech rather than increasing them. Option C misrepresents the ruling's significance; it directly influenced free speech protections. Option D is also inaccurate, as the ruling did not create a special class of speech but rather reinforced protections for all forms of expression.