This question is based on a photograph of a domestic standoff between protesters and military police in Arlington, Virginia, in the late 1960s. A female protester extends a flower to a military police officer who is armed and holding his baton. Another protester holds a sign that states: “Free...Leaders Jailed For Aiding Anti-War GIs.” Other military police officers hold their batons tightly as they stand like a barrier in front of the young protesters.

Q. This photo likely depicts what domestic conflict during the 1960s?

This question is based on an editorial cartoon published in the Philadelphia Press in 1898. It is entitled “Ten Thousand Miles from Tip to Tip.” It depicts an American eagle hovering over the globe with its wings extended from Puerto Rico to the Philippines. Below this larger eagle is a smaller eagle with a wingspan that extends from the East Coast to the Mississippi River. This smaller illustration is labeled with a different date: 1798.

Q. The widespread wings of the American eagle in this cartoon best represent

This questions is based on a political cartoon published in 1904. It shows President Theodore Roosevelt tiptoeing barefoot through the Caribbean Sea, dragging the US Navy along with him. He carries a “big stick,” and the title reads “The Big Stick in the Caribbean Sea.” Additionally, the naval boats boast names such as “The Sheriff,” “The Debt Collector,” and “The Receiver.”

Q. This political cartoon best represents what aspect of Theodore Roosevelt's presidential policies?

This questions is based on a political cartoon published in 1904. It shows President Theodore Roosevelt tiptoeing barefoot through the Caribbean Sea, dragging the US Navy along with him. He carries a “big stick,” and the title reads “The Big Stick in the Caribbean Sea.” Additionally, the naval boats boast names such as “The Sheriff,” “The Debt Collector,” and “The Receiver.”

Q. What does the political cartoon imply about Theodore Roosevelt and the US Navy's involvement in Latin America at that time?

This question is based on an excerpt of President Abraham Lincoln's famous “House Divided” speech, which he delivered during a debate in Spring field, Illinois, against Stephen Douglas during his campaign for the US Senate in 1858. Lincoln eventually lost the race to Douglas, but his speech lives on as a prelude to sectional tensions that precipitated the American Civil War.

"I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new—North as well as South."

Q. When Abraham Lincoln talks about a “house divided,” he is really talking about

This questions is based on the following text from the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution in 1789 as a political compromise. Proponents of the Bill of Rights wanted to ensure that the Constitution 1s a living document that could be amended. ‘The Bill of Rights offers the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the foundational governing document of the United States of America.

THE BILL oF RIGHTs (full text)

Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Q. Which of the following is NOT an amendment discussed in the Bill of Rights?

This question is based on a painting adapted by a photograph taken in Tiananmen Square (Beijing, China) in 1989. The painting (and original photo) show a man protesting the encroachment of Chinese communist tanks on a crowd of protesters. The man has become famously known as “Tank Man,” though his true identity remains a mystery.

Q. What historical sentiment does this portrait illustrate?

This question is based on an editorial cartoon, which was first published in 1912 and is now in the archives of the National Child Labor Committee. The cartoon depicts a giant hand—labeled “Child Labor Employer’—squashing a crowd of child laborers. The child laborers struggle to resist the diamond-studded hand of “Big Business.”

Q. Analyzing this political cartoon, what can be assumed about the artist?

This question refer to the following excerpt from U.S. History For Dummies, by Steve Wiegand (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.).

Partly because of error and partly because of wishful thinking, Columbus estimated the distance to the Indies at approximately 2,500 miles, which was about 7,500 miles short. But after a voyage of about five weeks, he and his crew, totaling 90 men, did find land at around 2:00 a.m. on October 12, 1492. It was an island in the Bahamas, which he called San Salvador. The timing of the discovery was good; it came even as the crews of the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria were muttering about a mutiny.

Columbus next sailed to Cuba, where he found a few spices and little gold. Sailing on to an island he called Hispaniola (today’s Dominican Republic and Haiti), the Santa Maria hit a reef on Christmas Eve, 1492. Columbus abandoned the ship, set up a trading outpost he called Navidad, left some men to operate it, and sailed back to Spain in his other two ships.

So enthusiastically did people greet the news of his return that on his second voyage to Hispaniola, Columbus had 17 ships and more than 1,200 men. But this time he ran into more than a little disappointment. Natives had wiped out his trading post after his men became too grabby with the local gold and the local women. Worse, most of the men he brought with him had come only for gold and other riches, and they didn’t care about setting up a permanent colony. Because of the lack of treasures, they soon wanted to go home. And the natives lost interest in the newcomers after the novelty of the Spanish trinkets wore off.

Q. Why did Columbus cut his first voyage short?

This question refer to the following excerpt from U.S. History For Dummies, by Steve Wiegand (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.).

On his second trip to the Americas in 1493, Columbus stopped by the Canary Islands and picked up some sugar cane cuttings. He planted them on Hispaniola, and they thrived. In 1516, the first sugar grown in the New World was presented to King Carlos I of Spain. By 1531, it was as commercially important to the Spanish colonial economy as gold.

Planters soon discovered a by-product as well. The juice left over after the sugar was pressed out of the cane and crystallized was called melasas by the Spanish (and molasses by the English). Mixing this juice with water and leaving it out in the sun created a potent and tasty fermented drink. They called it rum — perhaps after the word for sugar cane, Saccharum officinarum. The stuff was great for long sea voyages because it didn’t go bad.

Sugar and rum became so popular that sugar plantations mushroomed all over the Caribbean.

Q. How many years did it take before the first sugar cane grown in the New World was presented to the king of Spain?

Q. The graph shows the total number of births around the entire world in one year as compared to the total fertility rate (TFR). The graph shows a steady decline in the TFR — that is, the number of children born to the average woman — yet the total number of births in the world remains the same. Why is that?

The Department of Labor operates under the mandate that the most important capital is human capital. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which also sets minimum wage and overtime pay standards in the private and government sectors, has specific provisions designed to protect children—the future workforce of America. Employment for minors now must conform to the following restrictions, which apply to all labor except farm labor. First, 16- or 17-year-olds may legally obtain employment as long as the job is not determined to be dangerous or ruinous to their health or well-being. Second, 14- or 15-year-olds may also work during specific hours at certain jobs as long as their employment does not negatively affect their health, schooling, or well-being. Employment of children under 14 years of age is usually prohibited. The Department of Labor has already classified 17 nonagricultural occupations as being unsuitable for minors.

Q. According to the regulations described, all of the following could legally be used to deny a minor employment EXCEPT

The Department of Labor operates under the mandate that the most important capital is human capital. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which also sets minimum wage and overtime pay standards in the private and government sectors, has specific provisions designed to protect children—the future workforce of America. Employment for minors now must conform to the following restrictions, which apply to all labor except farm labor. First, 16- or 17-year-olds may legally obtain employment as long as the job is not determined to be dangerous or ruinous to their health or well-being. Second, 14- or 15-year-olds may also work during specific hours at certain jobs as long as their employment does not negatively affect their health, schooling, or well-being. Employment of children under 14 years of age is usually prohibited. The Department of Labor has already classified 17 nonagricultural occupations as being unsuitable for minors. The Department of Labor operates under the mandate that the most important capital is human capital. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which also sets minimum wage and overtime pay standards in the private and government sectors, has specific provisions designed to protect children—the future workforce of America. Employment for minors now must conform to the following restrictions, which apply to all labor except farm labor. First, 16- or 17-year-olds may legally obtain employment as long as the job is not determined to be dangerous or ruinous to their health or well-being. Second, 14- or 15-year-olds may also work during specific hours at certain jobs as long as their employment does not negatively affect their health, schooling, or well-being. Employment of children under 14 years of age is usually prohibited. The Department of Labor has already classified 17 nonagricultural occupations as being unsuitable for minors.

Q. The most support for the passage of the FLSA likely came from

TAB 1: Timeline of events following the end of World War II

1945: Yalta Conference: The Allies of World War II (the USA, the USSR, Great Britain, and France) divide Germany into four occupation zones.

1947: Marshall Plan: A comprehensive program of economic assistance for the war-ravaged countries of Western Europe.

1948: Berlin Airlift: In response to Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin’s attempt to block supplies to Berliners, France, Britain, and the United States launch the Berlin Airlift to supply the citizens of Berlin by air.

1949: North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO): Western nations unite in order to resist Communist expansion.

1955: Warsaw Pact: Soviet Union and Eastern European Communist nations unite to oppose NATO.

Q. Why was the Berlin Airlift necessary?

TAB 1: Timeline of events following the end of World War II

1945: Yalta Conference: The Allies of World War II (the USA, the USSR, Great Britain, and France) divide Germany into four occupation zones.

1947: Marshall Plan: A comprehensive program of economic assistance for the war-ravaged countries of Western Europe.

1948: Berlin Airlift: In response to Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin’s attempt to block supplies to Berliners, France, Britain, and the United States launch the Berlin Airlift to supply the citizens of Berlin by air.

1949: North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO): Western nations unite in order to resist Communist expansion.

1955: Warsaw Pact: Soviet Union and Eastern European Communist nations unite to oppose NATO.

Q. Based on the map, which of the following statements is true?

“Ulysses S. Grant concluded by 1863 that the very nature of a war to preserve the Union states would have the effect of changing those states and thus altering the Union.”

Q. Which of the following historical developments best supports Grant’s conclusion?

The 24th Amendment states that “Non-payment of taxes cannot be used as a reason for denying to any citizen the right to vote for president, vice president, or a member of Congress.”

Q. This amendment to the U.S. Constitution upholds which of the following common law principles?

This question is based on a map published in 1970 in the National Atlas of the United States. The map shows the breakdown of allegiances between the Union and Confederacy in the Civil War. The black states represent Union states. The solid gray states represent Union territories that did not permit slavery. ‘The states in horizontal stripes represent the “border states” of the Union that permitted slavery but did not join the Confederacy. The light gray state is Kansas, known at the time as “Bleeding Kansas” for its bloodshed over slavery and abolition. Kansas eventually entered the Union. ‘The states in gray with diagonal stripes represent Union territories that permitted slavery. And the states in light gray with stars represent the Confederacy, which permitted slavery.

Q. According to this map, Texas was a

Look at the population pyramid for the year 2012. Notice that the edges appear ragged. Shorter lines mean fewer people in that age group. There are noticeably fewer people in the 30-to-40 age group.

Q. In approximately what time period would these people have been born?

Q. Which of the following reasons best explains why there are fewer people in the 30-to-40 age group in the 2012 graph?

This question refer to the following passage about the 1920s, excerpted from U.S. History For Dummies, by Steve Wiegand (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.).

Below the veneer of prosperity, there were indications of trouble. More and more wealth was being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and government did far more for the rich than the poor. It was estimated, for example, that federal tax cuts saved the hugely wealthy financier Andrew Mellon (who also happened to be Hoover’s treasury secretary) almost as much money as was saved by all the taxpayers in the entire state of Nebraska.

Supreme Court decisions struck down minimum wage laws for women and children and made it easier for big business to swallow up smaller ones and become de facto monopolies. And union membership declined as organized labor was unable to compete with the aura of good times.

Probably worst off were American farmers. They had expanded production during World War I to feed the troops, and when demand and prices faded after the war, they were hit hard. Farm income dropped by 50 percent during the 1920s, and more than 3 million farmers left their farms for towns and cities.

Q. Which of the following is another example that supports the generalization that, “Below the veneer of prosperity, there were indications of trouble”?

This question refer to the following passage about the 1920s, excerpted from U.S. History For Dummies, by Steve Wiegand (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.).

Below the veneer of prosperity, there were indications of trouble. More and more wealth was being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and government did far more for the rich than the poor. It was estimated, for example, that federal tax cuts saved the hugely wealthy financier Andrew Mellon (who also happened to be Hoover’s treasury secretary) almost as much money as was saved by all the taxpayers in the entire state of Nebraska.

Supreme Court decisions struck down minimum wage laws for women and children and made it easier for big business to swallow up smaller ones and become de facto monopolies. And union membership declined as organized labor was unable to compete with the aura of good times.

Probably worst off were American farmers. They had expanded production during World War I to feed the troops, and when demand and prices faded after the war, they were hit hard. Farm income dropped by 50 percent during the 1920s, and more than 3 million farmers left their farms for towns and cities.

Q. Why did union membership decline in the 1920s?

This question is based on the following excerpt from The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith (Thrifty Books).

The increase of revenue and stock is the increase of national wealth…. Is this improvement in the circumstances of the lower ranks of the people to be regarded as an advantage or as an inconvenience to the society? The answer seems at first sight abundantly plain. Servants, laborers, and workmen of different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged. The liberal reward of labor, as it encourages the propagation, so it increases the industry of the common people. The wages of labor are the encouragement of industry, which, like every other human quality, improves in proportion to the encouragement it receives. A plentiful subsistence increases the bodily strength of the laborer, and the comfortable hope of bettering his condition, and of ending his days perhaps in ease and plenty, animates him to exert that strength to the utmost. Where wages are high, accordingly, we shall always find the workmen more active, diligent, and expeditious than where they are low.

Q. What does Smith mean by “what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole”?

This question is based on the following excerpt from The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith (Thrifty Books).

The increase of revenue and stock is the increase of national wealth…. Is this improvement in the circumstances of the lower ranks of the people to be regarded as an advantage or as an inconvenience to the society? The answer seems at first sight abundantly plain. Servants, laborers, and workmen of different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged. The liberal reward of labor, as it encourages the propagation, so it increases the industry of the common people. The wages of labor are the encouragement of industry, which, like every other human quality, improves in proportion to the encouragement it receives. A plentiful subsistence increases the bodily strength of the laborer, and the comfortable hope of bettering his condition, and of ending his days perhaps in ease and plenty, animates him to exert that strength to the utmost. Where wages are high, accordingly, we shall always find the workmen more active, diligent, and expeditious than where they are low.

Q. According to Adam Smith, how should employers treat the financial well-being of their employees?

This question is based on the following excerpt from The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith (Thrifty Books).

The increase of revenue and stock is the increase of national wealth…. Is this improvement in the circumstances of the lower ranks of the people to be regarded as an advantage or as an inconvenience to the society? The answer seems at first sight abundantly plain. Servants, laborers, and workmen of different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged. The liberal reward of labor, as it encourages the propagation, so it increases the industry of the common people. The wages of labor are the encouragement of industry, which, like every other human quality, improves in proportion to the encouragement it receives. A plentiful subsistence increases the bodily strength of the laborer, and the comfortable hope of bettering his condition, and of ending his days perhaps in ease and plenty, animates him to exert that strength to the utmost. Where wages are high, accordingly, we shall always find the workmen more active, diligent, and expeditious than where they are low.

Q. When Henry Ford’s Model T car proved to be a success, he doubled his workers’ wages, even when all other car manufacturers at the time would not raise wages. Would he and Adam Smith have agreed on this issue?

This question refer to the following passage about the Cuban Missile Crisis, excerpted from U.S. History For Dummies, by Steve Wiegand (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.).

During the summer of 1962, the Soviets began developing nuclear missile sites in Cuba. That meant they could easily strike targets over much of North and South America. When air reconnaissance photos confirmed the sites’ presence on October 14, President John F. Kennedy had to make a tough choice: Destroy the sites and quite possibly trigger World War III, or do nothing, and not only expose the country to nuclear destruction but, in effect, concede first place in the world domination race to the USSR.

Kennedy decided to get tough. On October 22, 1963, he went on national television and announced the U.S. Navy would throw a blockade around Cuba and turn away any ships carrying materials that could be used at the missile sites. He also demanded the sites be dismantled. Then the world waited for the Russian reaction.

On October 26, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev send a message suggesting the missiles would be removed if the United States promised not to invade Cuba and eventually removed some U.S. missiles from Turkey. The crisis — perhaps the closest the world came to nuclear conflict during the Cold War — was over, and the payoffs were ample.

Q. Why was the placement of Soviet missiles in Cuba so important to both the Soviet Union and the United States?

This question refer to the following passage about the Cuban Missile Crisis, excerpted from U.S. History For Dummies, by Steve Wiegand (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.).

During the summer of 1962, the Soviets began developing nuclear missile sites in Cuba. That meant they could easily strike targets over much of North and South America. When air reconnaissance photos confirmed the sites’ presence on October 14, President John F. Kennedy had to make a tough choice: Destroy the sites and quite possibly trigger World War III, or do nothing, and not only expose the country to nuclear destruction but, in effect, concede first place in the world domination race to the USSR.

Kennedy decided to get tough. On October 22, 1963, he went on national television and announced the U.S. Navy would throw a blockade around Cuba and turn away any ships carrying materials that could be used at the missile sites. He also demanded the sites be dismantled. Then the world waited for the Russian reaction.

On October 26, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev send a message suggesting the missiles would be removed if the United States promised not to invade Cuba and eventually removed some U.S. missiles from Turkey. The crisis — perhaps the closest the world came to nuclear conflict during the Cold War — was over, and the payoffs were ample.

Q. What triggered the Soviet move to put missiles capable of attacking the United States into bases in Cuba?