Hi,
Please help me wiht this question.
I selcted option C but the official answer is E
Is the OA correct ?
Supreme cort decision
This topic has expert replies
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:33 pm
- Thanked: 5 times
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
Tough one. passage summary:
1903: Supreme Court (SC) ruled against native americans in a case
Some guy named Blue "properly" (author's opinion) notes that the SC basically said the US Gov't has power over the tribes. But he "fails" (author's opinion) to note a bigger impact of the decision: afterwards, gov't stopped making agreements with the tribes and just did what it wanted.
Other people thought this (gov't just doing what it wanted) happened in 1871, but it didn't (author's opinion). Gov't kept negotiating agreements it treated as legislation instead of treaties. (Implication: before 1871, gov't negotiated treaties; after 1871, gov't negotiated agreements to be passed as legislation)
After the 1903 case, the gov't stopped even negotiating things as agreements and just did what it wanted.
Choice C says that the gov't no longer needed to conclude a formal agreement, which implies that the gov't did have to conclude a formal agreement before the 1903 case. But look at the last line of the passage: "the government did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent." That means they didn't HAVE to obtain agreement by law or anything - they did it because they were being polite or something like that.
Now go back up to lines 9 and 10, where it talks about "the Court's assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress over Native American affairs." That means the Court decided that Congress could do whatever it wanted and the tribes couldn't do anything about it (at least, relative to challenging Congress via the Supreme Court).
1903: Supreme Court (SC) ruled against native americans in a case
Some guy named Blue "properly" (author's opinion) notes that the SC basically said the US Gov't has power over the tribes. But he "fails" (author's opinion) to note a bigger impact of the decision: afterwards, gov't stopped making agreements with the tribes and just did what it wanted.
Other people thought this (gov't just doing what it wanted) happened in 1871, but it didn't (author's opinion). Gov't kept negotiating agreements it treated as legislation instead of treaties. (Implication: before 1871, gov't negotiated treaties; after 1871, gov't negotiated agreements to be passed as legislation)
After the 1903 case, the gov't stopped even negotiating things as agreements and just did what it wanted.
Choice C says that the gov't no longer needed to conclude a formal agreement, which implies that the gov't did have to conclude a formal agreement before the 1903 case. But look at the last line of the passage: "the government did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent." That means they didn't HAVE to obtain agreement by law or anything - they did it because they were being polite or something like that.
Now go back up to lines 9 and 10, where it talks about "the Court's assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress over Native American affairs." That means the Court decided that Congress could do whatever it wanted and the tribes couldn't do anything about it (at least, relative to challenging Congress via the Supreme Court).
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:33 pm
- Thanked: 5 times
Stacey Koprince wrote:Tough one. passage summary:
1903: Supreme Court (SC) ruled against native americans in a case
Some guy named Blue "properly" (author's opinion) notes that the SC basically said the US Gov't has power over the tribes. But he "fails" (author's opinion) to note a bigger impact of the decision: afterwards, gov't stopped making agreements with the tribes and just did what it wanted.
Other people thought this (gov't just doing what it wanted) happened in 1871, but it didn't (author's opinion). Gov't kept negotiating agreements it treated as legislation instead of treaties. (Implication: before 1871, gov't negotiated treaties; after 1871, gov't negotiated agreements to be passed as legislation)
After the 1903 case, the gov't stopped even negotiating things as agreements and just did what it wanted.
Choice C says that the gov't no longer needed to conclude a formal agreement, which implies that the gov't did have to conclude a formal agreement before the 1903 case. But look at the last line of the passage: "the government did away with what had increasingly become the empty formality of obtaining tribal consent." That means they didn't HAVE to obtain agreement by law or anything - they did it because they were being polite or something like that.
Now go back up to lines 9 and 10, where it talks about "the Court's assertion of a virtually unlimited unilateral power of Congress over Native American affairs." That means the Court decided that Congress could do whatever it wanted and the tribes couldn't do anything about it (at least, relative to challenging Congress via the Supreme Court).
Does that simply mean that we can eliminate option C because "The federal govt even before 1903(when the lone wolf decision was passed) did not pay much attention to the treaties or documents. Like u has said they were just trying to be nice or some thing..So this was not a new phenomena that occured after the lone wolf decision was made"???
Is this ok Stacey ?
Thanks,
Vignesh
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
exactly - the question specifically asks what happened as a result of the Lone Wolf decision. If something started before that, then it can't have happened as a result of that case.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:07 pm
- Location: Boston .US
- Thanked: 1 times
This is another quetion from the same passage I marked answer as
B but OA is E.
Can any one please explain it.?
As an element in the argument presented by the author of the passage, the reference to Blue Clark’s study of the Lone Wolf case serves primarily to
A. point out that this episode in Native American history has received inadequate attention from scholars
B. support the contention of the author of the passage that the Lone Wolf decision had a greater long-term impact than did the congressional action of 1871
C. challenge the validity of the Supreme Court’s decision confirming the unlimited unilateral power of Congress in Native American affairs
D. refute the argument of commentators who regard the congressional action of 1871 as the end of the era of formal negotiation between the federal government and Native American tribes
E. introduce a view about the Lone Wolf decision that the author will expand upon
B but OA is E.
Can any one please explain it.?
As an element in the argument presented by the author of the passage, the reference to Blue Clark’s study of the Lone Wolf case serves primarily to
A. point out that this episode in Native American history has received inadequate attention from scholars
B. support the contention of the author of the passage that the Lone Wolf decision had a greater long-term impact than did the congressional action of 1871
C. challenge the validity of the Supreme Court’s decision confirming the unlimited unilateral power of Congress in Native American affairs
D. refute the argument of commentators who regard the congressional action of 1871 as the end of the era of formal negotiation between the federal government and Native American tribes
E. introduce a view about the Lone Wolf decision that the author will expand upon
Regards,
Priyanka
Priyanka
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
The author does relate the Lone Wolf decision to the 1871 action, and the author does think the Lone Wolf decision had a "far-reaching impact" (though he doesn't actually say the impact is greater than the impact of the 1871 action). The question asks about the purpose of introducing Blue Clark's study, however - and choice B says that Blue Clark's study SUPPORTS the author's contention about a "greater long-term impact." It doesn't. Blue Clark "fails to note the decision's more far-reaching impact." If Blue Clark didn't even notice this far-reaching impact, then the study couldn't support a contention that this impact was greater than that of the 1871 action.
Rather, the author uses Blue Clark to introduce what he really wants to talk about. He first agrees that Blue Clark "properly" interprets one thing "but" Blue Clark "fails to note" something else - and this something else is the point the author wants to make. That's consistent with the language in choice E.
Note that B is a very tempting answer because it says something that we might want to infer from the passage - but this choice does not actually address the specific question asked, which is the author's purpose for discussing Blue Clark.
Rather, the author uses Blue Clark to introduce what he really wants to talk about. He first agrees that Blue Clark "properly" interprets one thing "but" Blue Clark "fails to note" something else - and this something else is the point the author wants to make. That's consistent with the language in choice E.
Note that B is a very tempting answer because it says something that we might want to infer from the passage - but this choice does not actually address the specific question asked, which is the author's purpose for discussing Blue Clark.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:03 am
- Location: Paris, France
- Thanked: 2 times
- GMAT Score:730
back to the first question, it remains foggy the way they presented the fact that formal agreements were "bypassed" even before...the fact that they were "empty & formal" does not mean they were not existing...