was vs has been

Question

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

(A) was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it
(B) was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(C) was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(D) has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
(E) has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

OA : E

Very specific doubt. In A, B, C - OG says “was never applied” is wrong tense.How do we decide that it's true that the provision has never been applied, either in the past or up to this point in time.Can someone please elaborate and explain this and then justify E using similar reasoning.

Stacey has explained it in this post but its not clear to me. (https://www.beatthegmat.com/usage-of-has ... 19983.html)

blackjack · Answer

Another way of looking at it is 'when asked to do it formally'---> 'it' is incorrect here as it can not refer to an idea. So choice remaining is D/E. In D 'whereby' is redundant, so, it leaves us with E.

naveenshan · Answer

When we speak about an occurrence of an event in the past from this point of time and we are specific that the time difference should be as minimum as possible ( as in this case ), then its better to use present perfect than simple past.. that is why "has never been applied" is better than "was never applied".

Given the answer as E I would state this reason, but with out knowing the ans its difficult to get this.. I am watching this topic for an expert reply..

sameerballani · Answer

gmatjeet wrote:Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

(A) was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it
(B) was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(C) was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(D) has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
(E) has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

OA : E

Very specific doubt. In A, B, C - OG says “was never applied” is wrong tense.How do we decide that it's true that the provision has never been applied, either in the past or up to this point in time.
Can someone please elaborate and explain this and then justify E using similar reasoning.

Constitution that was never applied
I would say to answer this we need to see the meaning that author is trying to convey in this sentence. The usage that was NEVER applied, shows that the provision has never been applied till date and since its inception.

Stacey has explained it in this post but its not clear to me. (https://www.beatthegmat.com/usage-of-has ... 19983.html)

Ashley@VeritasPrep · Answer

Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.

(A) was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it
(B) was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(C) was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(D) has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
(E) has never been applied, Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so

The usage "was never applied" is (as we know) simple past. Simple past does not touch the present -- it's basically locked back there in time and can't be tinkered with. So if I were to say that this provision "was never applied," it would mean that time had ended, or at least that our reliance on the Constitution had ended -- but in any case that this thing had come to an end and this application of the provision never happened -- the end.

"Has never been applied," on the other hand, is present perfect (as we also know). Present perfect CAN serve the function of essentially starting in the past and covering the time period that runs right up to the present. This provision still *could* be applied someday (since it's still part of the Constitution, and since we certainly still use the Constitution)... it just hasn't *yet*. This idea of "yet" requires the present perfect rather than the simple past (and certainly, if you ever literally use the word "yet," you'll need to accompany it with a perfect tense, e.g. "I have not read it yet," NOT "I did not read it yet").

An additional cue in this sentence is that you need the two bits of it to fit with each other. If I were to use "was never applied," I couldn't then say "Congress IS required," because remember, "was never applied" means that some time period has ended (a fact which would preclude the use of the present tense to talk about a requirement). There's no option that says "... was never applied, Congress WAS required...," so the only way to get a "match" here between sentence parts (and avoid other errors) is to go with E.

Ashley Newman-Owens
GMAT Instructor
Veritas Prep

Post helpful? Mosey your cursor on over to that Thank button and click, please! I will bake you an imaginary cake.

Gissinggy · Answer

Ashley, Could you explain "whereby" in answer C and D here? Thanks.

Ashley@VeritasPrep · Answer

Gissinggy wrote:Ashley,

Could you explain "whereby" in answer C and D here?

Thanks.

"Whereby" isn't used terribly frequently, but it just means "by which" or "through which" or "in accordance with which."

For instance:

"A revolution is an act of violence whereby one class shatters the authority of another."
James MacGregor Burns

"Are wars anything but the means whereby a nation is nourished, whereby it is strengthened, whereby it is buttressed?"
Marquis de Sade

In both of these cases, you can replace the "whereby" with "through which" or "by which."

Ashley Newman-Owens
GMAT Instructor
Veritas Prep

Post helpful? Mosey your cursor on over to that Thank button and click, please! I will bake you an imaginary cake.

Choose how you want to prepare

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

was vs has been

Chicago Booth

GMAT Course Reviews

Admissions Consulting Reviews

FREE GMAT PREP RESOURCES

GMAT PREP DEAL TRACKER