The Trump administration's decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census divided Capitol Hill on Tuesday, with Democrats saying the addition could skew the results and alter millions in government funding, while some Republicans praised it as a "commonsense" move. U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross announced late Monday the next effort to count every resident in the country will include a question about citizenship status. The U.S. Census Bureau conducts the survey every 10 years, with the next set for 2020. The deadline for finalizing the questions is Saturday. In a memo late Monday, Ross said he chose to include the query at the urging of the Department of Justice, which said it needed the citizenship data to better enforce a law protecting minority voting rights. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders defended the addition of the question, rejecting the notion that it might result in less federal aid to immigrant communities in the U.S. if immigrants are undercounted. Republicans on Capitol Hill welcomed the decision, which revives a practice that was abandoned in 1950, after being in place for more than 100 years, according to the Commerce Department. "It is imperative that the data gathered in the census is reliable, given the wide-ranging impacts it will have on U.S. policy. A question on citizenship is a reasonable, commonsense addition to the census," Senator Ted Cruz said in a statement Tuesday. But Democrats said the question would have the opposite effect discouraging undocumented immigrants and citizen family members from responding to the census, undermining the accuracy of the results. "We cannot accept an incomplete or unfair count in 2020 too much is at stake," Rep. Carolyn Maloney, co-chair of the Congressional Census Caucus, told VOA. "The census mandated by the [U.S.] Constitution affects the way that Federal and state funds are distributed and how district lines are drawn for both the city, state and Federal level." According to the above context, answer the following question. What committee does Maloney co-chair?
OPTIONS:
- census administration committed
- not enough information
- congressional census caucus
- senate census caucus
congressional census caucus

Eating less food at night time is sensible advice for someone trying to lose weight. The reason often given is that if eat you too much food at night, the body will store all those excess kilojoules as fat because we're inactive until the next day. The reason sounds plausible, but if it was one hundred percent true then world hunger could be solved by just feeding people one meal at night time. What really matters is how much is eaten over days and weeks for weight gain or weight loss, not so much when it is eaten. There is merit though in advice to eat less at night time as it can help a person to cut back on the total quantity of food eaten. Eating lots of food in the evening can also be a marker for unhealthy dietary habits, especially if much of that extra food is going to fuel couch surfing exploits. So even though advice to eat less at night time seems logical, it hasn't actually been well tested by science to see how effective it can be for losing weight. Filling this gap, a short-term study involving 29 healthy men looked at how 2 weeks of restricted night time eating fared against 2 weeks of 'normal' evening eating. Advice on restricting night eating was very clear: avoid any food or drink containing kilojoules between the hours of 7 pm and 6 am the next morning. No other changes to the participants' diet or lifestyle was required so each person was free to eat whatever they wished during the day time hours until early evening. Twenty seven of the twenty nine people complied with following this advice for 2 weeks as well as the 2 week control period. Eating at night a waistline hazard So did people eat less when restricting night time eating? Yes, equal to 1000 kilojoules (about 250 Calories) per day less than during their normal eating pattern. This small energy difference was enough to see the men lose 0.4 kg over the 2 week restriction period, and gain 0.6 kg over the 2 week control period. According to the above context, answer the following question. How long did it probably take the participants to complete the trail on restricting eating at night?
OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- 7pm to 6am
- 2 weeks
- 12 hours

Answer: 2 weeks

A long time ago, when humans still lived in cities, on a cold morning near the end of a long, cruel winter, in magnificent Central Park in the middle of magnificent New York City, a young squirrel named Patch was awakened very early by the growls of his empty stomach. A squirrel's home is called a drey. Patch's drey was very comfortable. He lived high up an old oak tree, in a hollowed-out stump of a big branch that had long ago been cut off by humans. The entrance was only just big enough for Patch to squeeze in and out, but the drey itself was spacious, for a squirrel. Patch had lined his drey with dry leaves, grasses and bits of newspaper. It was warm and dry, and on that cold morning he would have liked nothing better than to stay home all day and sleep. But he was so hungry. Hunger filled him like water fills a glass. The cherry and maple trees had not yet started to bud; flowers had not yet begun to grow; the juicy grubs and bugs of spring had not yet emerged; and it had been two days since Patch had found a nut. Imagine how hungry you would feel if you went two whole days without eating, and you may have some idea how Patch felt that morning. Patch poked his head out of the drey into the cold air and shivered as he looked around. Clumps of white, crumbly ice still clung to the ground. Gusts of cold wind shook and rustled the trees' bare branches. The pale and distant sun seemed drained of heat. Patch took a moment to satisfy himself that there were no dangers nearby, no hawk circling above or unleashed dog below. Then he emerged from his drey and began to look for acorns. But what marvels, what miracles, what mysteries are hidden inside those simple words! According to the above context, answer the following question. What is probably true about Patch?
OPTIONS:
- he is not a squirrel
- he is reckless
- he is careful
- not enough information
he is careful