15 DOLORES HUERTA AND THE UNITED FARM WORKERS Alicia Chávez One thing I’ve learned . . . is that having tremendous fears and anxieties is normal. . . . By doing whatever causes your anxiety, you overcome the fear, and strengthen your emotional, spiritual, activist muscles. Dolores Huerta While she appears mild-mannered and even soft-spoken, Dolores Huerta has been a fearless warrior in her career as an activist. Unflappable as a union organizer, uncompromising as a contract negotiator, unapologetic as she lived against the grain of the social and political norms of her era, she leaves an indelible legacy of labor-organizing in U.S. history. In 1962, after almost a decade of activism in the Stockton, California, chapter of the Community Service Organization, a self-help Mexican American civil rights organization, Huerta joined fellow activist César Chávez in co- founding the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA) to address the issues of migrant farm workers in California. In September 1965, the NFWA joined the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee, an affili- ate of the AFL-CIO, for the famous Delano Grape Strike, and a year later the two groups merged to form the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee, also an affiliate of the AFL-CIO. Later, the new union short- ened its name to the United Farm Workers of America (UFW). With her children in the backseat of her barely operable car, and liv- ing on only $5 per week, Huerta embarked on an exhausting and danger- 240 DOLORES HUERTA AND THE UNITED FARM WORKERS 241 ous journey of speaking engagements and door-to-door canvassing, ac- tivities that established the UFW’s membership base. She also did strate- gic planning for the Grape Strike of 1965, and in 1968 and 1969, she directed the table grape boycott in New York City. In her unyielding style, Huerta became the first woman and the first Mexican American to nego- tiate a union contract with California growers in 1970. As the UFW ex- tended its reach to the lettuce and strawberry fields, Huerta continued her unflagging organizing while lobbying legislators in both Sacramento and Washington, D.C., for laws that would aid farm workers. Her work as a persuasive lobbyist facilitated the passage of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975, which for the first time recognized and protected the collective bargaining rights of agricultural laborers in California. Huerta’s work seems all the more extraordinary when combined with her rearing eleven children. In addition, she carried her messages and life lessons to the wider political world around her, speaking out, for example, on women’s rights. Her work illuminated how women’s activism could be an essential ingredient to a successful Mexican American political movement, and how political engagement could be a path to women’s self-determination. Huerta’s activism was sparked by the deleterious impact that trans- formations in California agriculture had on Mexican communities there. Once marked by individual relationships to the land, agricultural pro- duction became a very impersonal agribusiness, with an increasing de- mand for inexpensive wage labor, on land where there had formerly been tenant farmers. These changes began at the turn of the twentieth cen- tury with the technological improvements in farming during the advance of industrialization; by World War II, a lot of agricultural land was owned in large tracts by corporations who sought low-wage workers to perform farm labor. The U.S. government permitted labor contracting in Mexico and other places to meet the increased demand for wartime foodstuffs. The most physically arduous jobs were regarded as menial and reserved for these nonwhite laborers. In this economic milieu, wages and work- ing conditions declined substantially. Life expectancy for California farm workers by the 1960s was only approximately forty-nine years. Exposed to dangerous pesticide chemicals, entire families often had to work and continually migrate with the growing seasons, keeping their children out of school. While Dolores Huerta did not grow up in a migrant fam- ily, her evolution as an organizer stemmed from lessons she learned from her parents and her own youthful experiences in a Mexican agricultural community. 242 LATINA LEGACIES Dolores Huerta was born Dolores Fernández on April 10, 1930, to Juan and Alicia Fernández, in the small coal-mining town of Dawson, New Mexico. Huerta’s father was a coal miner, but like many of his peers, he supplemented his income with farm labor, traveling to Colorado, Ne- braska, and Wyoming for the beet harvests. Fernández also developed a strong interest in labor issues and used his predominantly Latino local union as a base upon which to win election to the New Mexico state leg- islature in 1938.1 When her parents divorced in 1935, five-year-old Dolores and her brothers, John and Marshall, moved with their mother to the central San Joaquin Valley agricultural community of Stockton. Alicia Fernández found it very difficult to support her young family as a single parent in this Depression-era town. Dolores described her mother as “a very gen- teel woman, very quiet but very hardworking,” yet also “a very ambitious woman.” Her mother saved the wages she earned at her nighttime can- nery shift (a common occupation for Mexican-origin women) and as a waitress during the day in order to buy her own business.2 First she bought a lunch counter, then a bigger restaurant, and finally, during World War II, a seventy-room hotel. She often offered free lodging to farm worker families and thus modeled for Huerta the value of acquiring resources and knowledge that could meet community needs.3 Both her parents demon- strated to Dolores the value of leadership and service. Another crucial lesson Huerta learned from her mother was the value of self-sufficiency for both men and women. With five children in the house, there was plenty of domestic work to be done, but it was divided fairly between the boys and the girls: “My brothers were taught to be self- sufficient. We all had to wash the laundry, clean . . . . From very young, she taught us how to work.” Dolores and her brothers labored in their mother’s restaurant in the summers, and though it went against her mother’s wishes, Dolores also went to work in the fields and the packing sheds in order to experience the work lives of her friends. According to Huerta, her mother’s entrepreneurial successes and business acumen en- abled her to go to school and enjoy “a more affluent background than the other kids.”4 Dolores Huerta learned from her mother to chart her own course in life, to work with determination, and to take action for those in need. In recalling her early life, Huerta fondly described the vibrant diver- sity of her neighborhood in Stockton, with Japanese, Chinese, Jewish, Filipino, and Mexican folks of the working class—all intermingling. She participated in a wide range of youth activities, which, years later, she DOLORES HUERTA AND THE UNITED FARM WORKERS 243 indicated had taught her to organize people and to deal with them demo- cratically. A Girl Scout until the age of eighteen, she also took piano and violin lessons, studied dance, sang in the church choir, and participated in Catholic youth organizations. She knew she was more fortunate than most of her Mexican American peers. Her class status protected her from the stings of discrimination, particularly in Lafayette grammar school and Jackson Junior High, where she studied in her early adolescence. “We all hated the teachers,” Huerta declared about the racially mixed groups of students of which she was a part, “but we didn’t hate each other.” This all changed when she got to Stockton High School in 1944. For the first time, Huerta felt discriminated against in a segregated environment. A straight “A” student, Huerta experienced memorable disappointment when a teacher told her that she could not receive an “A” grade because the teacher did not believe that Dolores had submitted her own original work.5 This experience marked the beginning of her political awakening. As was common for women of her generation, Dolores Huerta married her high school sweetheart, Ralph Head, after graduation in 1948. He was an Irish American with whom she had the first two of her eleven chil- dren, Celeste and Lori. Though she described him in a later interview as “a very nice man, very responsible,” they divorced after three years. Huerta then began studying, first at Stockton Junior College and then at the College of the Pacific in Stockton, where she earned an associate’s de- gree and provisional teaching credentials. Afterward, she taught English to rural children for one year.6 Working with the children of farm workers gave Huerta a very intimate perspective on their lives. She decided there- after that she could do far more for farm workers by organizing them around labor issues than by teaching basic lessons to their barefoot, hungry children. She found a venue to begin community service work when she met organizer Fred Ross in 1955. Dolores Huerta has never stopped identify- ing the day she met Ross as among the most important events of her life. Ross traveled around California, organizing Mexican Americans into chapters of the Community Service Organization (CSO), a statewide con- federation that mobilized Mexican American communities for voter reg- istration campaigns and improved public services. Upon his arrival in Stockton, Ross assured Huerta and others that they could “turn every- thing around” by registering Mexican-origin voters and electing Spanish- speaking representatives. Huerta, however, was not immediately or easily convinced. She recalled with some embarrassment: “I thought he was a communist, so I went to the FBI and had him checked out. I really did 244 LATINA LEGACIES that. . . . See how middle class I was. In fact, I was a registered Republican at the time.” Before long, however, Huerta concluded that Ross’s organi- zation had potential, as she had “always hated injustice” and “always wanted to do something to change things.” “Fred opened a door for me,” Huerta declared. “Without him,” she insisted, “I’d probably just be in some stupid suburb somewhere.” Huerta worked with the CSO to regis- ter Mexican-origin voters, to keep the police department from “search- ing and harassing people arbitrarily,” and to get equitable access to the county hospital.7 Huerta continued her work with the CSO, and through the organization, she met César Chávez in the late 1950s. After a very suc- cessful voter registration drive in 1960, Chávez, then executive director of the CSO, decided that Huerta would make a talented lobbyist; in 1961, he sent her to Sacramento where she headed the legislative program of the CSO. Her work laid the foundation of almost everything in that leg- islative season that benefited California workers. One of Huerta’s primary concerns was that many farm workers, as Mexican citizens, were excluded from the social service benefits that had been established in the New Deal era, like social security, disability insurance, and retirement pensions. Huerta pushed for legislation that would ease the burdens that workers experienced trying to navigate their way through life in the United States, regardless of citizenship status or language skills. At the California state capitol, Huerta, with her small children at her side, lobbied successfully with her team for an old-age pension, a welfare bill, the right to register voters door to door, and the right to take the driver’s license exam in Spanish. During her CSO years, Huerta met and married her second husband, Ventura Huerta, also a community organizer. Together they had five chil- dren: Fidel, Emilio, Vincent, Alicia, and Angela. Huerta described it as “a terrible marriage,” which deteriorated due to incompatible temperaments and disagreements about the manner in which Huerta balanced her pub- lic commitments with her private, domestic ones. Huerta later said of the marriage: “I knew I wasn’t comfortable in a wife’s role, but I wasn’t clearly facing the issue. . . . I didn’t come out and tell my husband that I cared more about helping other people than cleaning our house and doing my hair.” Her second marriage ended in 1961; after it dissolved, she stated, “I put everything into my relationships,” but “I have to do what I have to do.”8 Huerta thus alluded to the fact that despite her own personal commitment to her spouse, she refused to let their conflicting visions of her responsibilities prevent her from working as an activist in the Mexi- can American community, as she felt compelled to do. DOLORES HUERTA AND THE UNITED FARM WORKERS 245 Meanwhile, Huerta and César Chávez were becoming more interested in rural labor issues than urban ones, and they tried to give farm workers more visibility within the CSO. When the organization persisted with its primary focus on urban populations, both Huerta and Chávez resigned. In 1962, they co-founded the National Farm Workers Association in Chávez’s hometown of Delano, California, and began down the long road of forging an agricultural labor union in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Chávez was elected the first president, and Dolores Huerta and their col- league Gilbert Padilla were elected the first vice presidents. From that year forward, Huerta had a key role in shaping the union’s fortunes, and she has continued the work for over forty years. Huerta and Chávez relied on a method they had learned from Fred Ross, called the “house meeting,” to earn the trust of individual farm workers and persuade them to join the NFWA. They tried to persuade groups of workers in the neutral, safe space of someone’s home, where they could talk to them freely and at length about issues that farm workers faced, knowing that the workers were extremely vulnerable to dismissal and violent reprisals from growers. Labor leader Luisa Moreno (a close friend of Fred Ross) used the same tactic with great success among California cannery workers in the 1940s. Huerta sent regular correspondence to Chávez about her progress. She often lacked a working automobile, gas money, and a babysitter for her children, and she identified these things to Chávez as the “handicaps” of her organizing. With her children in tow, she canvassed the fields, strug- gling to garner support for the union and to provide for the needs of her kids at the same time. She told Chávez: “You can only imagine how rough my financial situation is. Any help I get from my two ex-es has to go for grub for my seven little hungry mouths, and I am keeping one jump ahead of PG and E [Pacific Gas and Electric] and the Water Dragons who close off water for non-payment.” Living on limited support from her children’s fathers and some sparse donations made to the organizing campaign, Huerta revealed a constant need for resources. Working for no regular income, Huerta and Chávez were also anxious in those early years over raising sufficient dues to cover the costs of organizing. She sometimes explained to Chávez, “I have not even tried to have any meetings, be- cause very few of these people up here are working steadily, and it doesn’t do me any good to have meetings if I have to wait another month to collect the dues, no?”9 Consequently, for Huerta, the possibility of using her educational train- ing to get substitute teacher certification, so that she could work a few 246 LATINA LEGACIES days a week to make ends meet, loomed large at that time. However, she ultimately decided to work for the NFWA full-time, giving up gainful employment and everything that goes with it. While Huerta was always briskly conscious of the impact that this sacrifice had on her family, her letters were rife with news of successful advances in the progress of the union. These included frequent reports of new members (with records of their dues payments) and the plans she and Chávez shared for creating a cooperative, a credit union, insurance policies (unemployment, health, life), and a newspaper, El Malcriado, all of which eventually came to pass. Dolores Huerta’s advocacy for farm workers took many forms. In 1965, she contacted the Department of Motor Vehicles to get revoked licenses reinstated and persuaded insurance companies to write automobile poli- cies for union members. She also pressured the Welfare Department of Kern County to set clear policies regarding patient access to the county hospital so that Mexicanos seeking medical attention would not be hu- miliated by hospital social workers.10 Dolores Huerta’s busy schedule was complicated even further by her continued political lobbying in both Sacramento and Washington, D.C. She began to develop a substantial rapport with legislators who were sym- pathetic to the union’s objectives. One of these was Congressman Phillip Burton of California, who in 1967 introduced a bill to extend the Na- tional Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to include agricultural workers—a bill that, despite Huerta’s efforts, did not pass. Huerta had forged a working relationship with Burton some years earlier when she had persuaded him to organize donations of stamps to the NFWA. Although César Chávez recognized that support from politicians could clearly help the union, he began to question the amount of time Huerta spent lobbying. She defended her support of the Aid to Dependent Children Bill in the late 1960s by saying, “Let me remind you that at least the workers we are trying to represent will have bread in the winter months.” Even as the demands of the NFWA work increased, Huerta continued to see certain legislative victories as paramount to securing true economic justice for farm workers.11 One of Huerta’s most important goals was the demise of the Bracero program. Begun in 1942 as a wartime emergency measure between the United States and Mexican governments, the program had provided for the legal contracting of large numbers of Mexican nationals to work in the agricultural fields of the Southwest. The program was renewed after the war as growers insisted the bracero (worker) migration was still necessary due to continued labor shortages, but these Mexicanos were often ill-paid and DOLORES HUERTA AND THE UNITED FARM WORKERS 247 ill-treated and had little recourse.12 Huerta and Chávez knew that as long as these workers were available to growers as “scab” labor (replacement during union strikes), strikers would never be able to force growers to negotiate with the their union. When Congress abolished the Bracero program in 1964, farm labor activists in California were encouraged by this victory. In the summer of 1965, Filipino workers in the Coachella Valley called a “wildcat” (sponta- neous, grassroots) grape strike. Because the hot climate of the area made the crop quickly vulnerable, growers agreed to raise the wages of workers within one week of the strike. Encouraged, these workers moved north- ward to the San Joaquin Valley, the base of the NFWA, to execute another strike under the banner of the Agricultural Workers Organizing Commit- tee (AWOC), AFL-CIO. They knew that it would be more difficult because of the much larger pool of available scab labor, and they knew that this strike would never be successful without the help of the Mexican work- ers of the NFWA. The leaders of the NFWA, including Huerta, were then faced with a momentous decision: to strike or not to strike in solidarity with AWOC. The NFWA plan had been to organize very discreetly for about five years, until they could get the whole San Joaquin Valley organized and acquire some resources, before executing a strike. Despite having no strike fund available, the NFWA members voted to join the AWOC in a grape strike. Perhaps a bit naive, they believed that the strike would last for a few days or a few weeks. Instead it lasted five long years. In September 1965, Mexican and Filipino workers in Delano, Califor- nia, walked off the fields, refusing to pick grapes. Three weeks after the initial walkout, the strike had spread, and almost three thousand workers had left the fields. Growers used legal injunctions to stop picketing and resorted to violence to subdue demonstrations and protect their scab re- placement workers. In contrast, nonviolent protest to effect social change marked union organizing from the beginning. Both César Chávez and Huerta adhered to the principles of Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Public pilgrimages, growing support from Catholic and Protestant church groups and clerics, and significant financial contribu- tions by the AFL-CIO helped build and sustain the new union—the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee. The 1966 march (known as the peregrinación, or Easter pilgrimage) to the state capitol in Sacramento in- creased the visibility of the union and made the workers’ struggle more than a labor issue—it became symbolic of a national civil rights move- ment among Mexican Americans.13 Built out of the Filipino AWOC and 248 LATINA LEGACIES the Mexican NFWA, the new union, which would soon be known as the UFW, would change the course of American labor history. Realizing that the battle would not be won in the fields of California, union leaders decided that they would have to carry their message to the marketplace, boycotting table grapes and other produce in supermarkets. Their objective was to force growers to negotiate contracts with the UFW that established increased benefits and improved conditions for union members; while they were successful in securing a few contracts by 1967, dozens of growers, including the powerful John Giumarra Corporation, would not budge. Although the boycott initially targeted only a few la- bels, Dolores Huerta ultimately moved to New York City, the center of grape distribution, to coordinate the industry-wide boycott in 1968 and 1969. The commercial boycott received tremendous public support and proved very effective, with polls showing that an estimated 17 million consumers supported the boycott by the early 1970s. In the fourth year of the boycott, growers found a powerful ally in the newly elected Cali- fornia Republican governor, Ronald Reagan, who ate grapes at several photo opportunities. In response, the UFW stepped up the boycott aspect of union activities, and by 1970 shipments to the top grape-consuming cities were down by 22 percent. Finally, on April 1, 1970, after five long years, one grower came through: Lionel Steinberg of the Freedman Ranches signed a contract with the UFW. Shipments of grapes produced on its land were now stamped with the UFW label, signaling the union’s approval to consumers. In the economic cli- mate of the boycott, “union” grapes could now be sold for a premium price, and the price of nonunion grapes sunk. As a result, growers began to clamor for the UFW union label on their product, and at that point Dolores Huerta and her colleagues could hardly negotiate the contracts fast enough. Finally, on July 29, 1970, John Giumarra Jr. and the rest of the growers in the Delano area met to sign contracts with the UFW at the union hall in Delano. Dolores Huerta handled the negotiations, and years later, as she reflected on the experience, she insisted, “It never, ever, ever, ever crossed my mind that it couldn’t happen. Not once. I always knew that we would be able to do it.”14 Huerta possessed the tenacity and faith that enable one to carry on for years working toward a seemingly impos- sible goal. In negotiating these historic contracts, Dolores Huerta earned a nick- name among the growers—“dragon lady”—referring to her ability to speak “with fire” as she held fast to the terms and conditions that UFW mem- bers demanded. At that time, twenty-six Delano-area growers signed con- DOLORES HUERTA AND THE UNITED FARM WORKERS 249 tracts, raising wages to $1.80 per hour plus $.20 per box, as well as estab- lishing provisions for hiring workers directly from the UFW hiring hall, hiring by seniority, and placing strict controls on the use of pesticides. Growers quickly became familiar with the intensity of Huerta’s style, and stories abounded of growers pleading to deal with someone other than Huerta. One representative exclaimed, “Dolores Huerta is crazy. . . . She’s a violent woman, where women, especially Mexican American women, are usually peaceful and pleasant.” Huerta was called “too quick to attack, too slow to listen,” by one politician. Even her successor, David Burciaga, who took over negotiations in 1973, reflected on the new need to “con- vince, not insult, the growers.” However, in Huerta’s pathbreaking work with the original contracts, she found the growers very insulting to her and the Mexican-origin members of her union. This explains why she felt her own strong style was justified: “Why do we need to be polite to people who are making racist statements at the table, or making sexist com- ments?” she questioned. “I think when they do that you have to call them at it because then also you are educating them in the process,” Huerta explained. Whatever anyone thought of her style, she did get substantial results.15 But the events of 1973 convinced her that protecting farm work- ers would continue to be an uphill battle. The initial contracts were set to expire that year, and growers colluded with the Teamsters Union to sign new contracts directly with the Teamsters without a vote among farm workers. The strike in the fields and the consumer boycott both began again that year. Once again, Huerta was there, serving as a backbone of UFW strategies. As one might expect in a movement with two determined visionaries, the relationship between Huerta and Chávez could be tense at times. Both believed passionately in their cause and committed their lives to overcom- ing seemingly insurmountable obstacles to realize its goals. Both raised families while living, working, and organizing in the fields. Both did these things for a sum of money so small, it can hardly be called an “income.” It is no surprise that facing such challenges day in and day out would raise tensions. The president of the UFW until his death in 1993, Chávez had become the national symbol of the farm worker movement, and even though he and Huerta did not favor celebrity, they both knew the sup- port it brought to their cause had some positive consequences. Wholly committed to the realization of UFW goals, Huerta often deferred to Chávez’s final authority on issues, especially in the beginning. Sometimes she did so calmly, as when she stated, “I bow to your better judgment and experience and will do as you say.” Other times, she did so with 250 LATINA LEGACIES sarcasm, as when she retorted, “But then again, I am not getting paid to ask questions, right?” On other occasions, and particularly later, she did exactly as she thought best. Whatever the case, she respected Chávez tre- mendously: “César Chávez is an extremely creative person,” she declared; “He is a genius.”16 Huerta knew that they were on the same page about things, and she exercised diplomacy in order to deal with him effectively and act upon her own views. For the most part, Chávez and Huerta man- aged to work together in a manner that enabled the best qualities of each to be put to work toward achieving union objectives.17 One of their most important victories came in 1975 with the passage of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA) in California. It was mod- eled after the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (also known as the Wagner Act), part of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal. The NLRA protected the right of laborers to organize and bargain collectively, and it established a board to review grievances—but it excluded agricultural la- borers from its provisions. The NLRA also established an enforcement arm, the National Labor Relations Board, to provide redress for workers, cer- tify elections, and curb unlawful labor practices by employers. The lack of these basic protections, and especially the lack of governmental redress against grower abuses, had hindered UFW organizing. Dolores Huerta was a major force in lobbying legislators to support the ALRA, which provided the right to boycott, voting rights for migrant seasonal workers, and se- cret ballot elections and control over the timing of these elections.18 Also, the ALRA, like the NLRA, established an enforcement board, the Agricul- tural Labor Relations Board (ALRB), for the redress of grievances and the certification of union elections. Initially regarded as a victory, ALRB became increasingly conservative during the late 1970s and early 1980s. At that time, a growing conserva- tive political mood in California—particularly after the 1982 election of Republican governor George Deukmejian—led to the appointment of board members who sympathized more with growers than with farm workers. According to Huerta, the ALRB began to rule consistently against the UFW in grievances brought before it. As a result, though the industry- wide grape boycott had been called off in 1978, it was instituted again in 1984. Huerta continued her lobbying efforts throughout the 1980s. In 1985, she lobbied to outlaw a federal “guest worker program” (a new incarna- tion of the bracero program), which would once again enable growers to legally bring Mexican nationals into the fields to work for below mini- mum wages in substandard conditions. When it was introduced, U.S. DOLORES HUERTA AND THE UNITED FARM WORKERS 251 congressman from southern California Howard Berman, a longtime ally of Huerta and the UFW, successfully led the opposition to the program.19 Huerta’s primary concern in this period, however, was lobbying to out- law the use of harmful pesticides. On September 14, 1988, in the course of a peaceful political rally where she spoke on that issue, San Francisco police severely beat Dolores Huerta. She suffered six broken ribs and the removal of her spleen in emergency surgery; she ultimately received an unprecedented monetary settlement from a lawsuit she brought against the offending law enforcement agency. The longevity of Dolores Huerta’s political career is particularly remark- able considering that at its height she embarked on her third marriage and reared another four children. She and Richard Chávez (brother of César) were the parents of Juanita, María Elena, Ricky, and Camilla. Speak- ing of the demands that her many duties placed on her, Huerta confessed: “I don’t feel proud of the suffering that my kids went through . . . but by the same token I know that they learned a lot in the process.” Managing this guilt as one of the biggest challenges in her life; she recalls “driving around Stockton with all these little babies in the car, the different dia- per changes for each one.”20 Huerta spoke forthrightly about the tremen- dous pressure she felt to be a conventional mother while she worked as a major American labor leader. Lori De León, her daughter, revealed, “She was always on the road, and we were left to take care of ourselves.” Huerta noted that, as in other poor people’s movements, farm workers of the UFW were very willing to care for one another’s children while other adults performed the work necessary to effect economic justice. Huerta has of- ten insisted that she could only truly improve the conditions of farm workers’ lives by living in the same circumstances as the workers. As a result, she could not realistically shelter her children from that reality. “Although criticized for putting la causa first, Dolores Huerta has had few regrets. As she informed [historian Margaret] Rose, ‘But now that I’ve seen how good they [my children] turned out, I don’t feel so guilty.’”21 She is filled with parental pride at the course of her children’s lives; many of her children now have careers rooted in community service and activism, with some holding advanced professional degrees. Huerta’s own experience as an activist and a mother has given her very particular views about the roles of women in unions and in public life in general. Her first engagement with mainstream U.S. feminism came in the late 1960s, when Huerta’s own place in the national spotlight gave her occasion to become acquainted with noted feminist Gloria Steinem. Huerta slowly began to incorporate woman-centered views into her own
I -s'2o.
100 Chapter 3 Chemical Bonds
UWL tnteractive versions of these problems may be assigned in OWL.
Orange-numbered problems are applied.
Section 3.2 What ls the Octet Rule? 3.17 Answer true or false. '
(a) The octet rule refers to the chemical bonding patterns of the first eight elements of the Periodic Table.
(b) The octet rule refers to the tendency ofcertain elements to react in such a way that they achieve an outer shell ofeight valence electrons.
(c) In gaining electrons, an atom becomes a posi- tively charged ion called a cation.
(d) When an atom forms an ion, only the number of . valence electrons changes; the number ofprotons
and neutrons in the nucleus does not change. (e) In forming ions, Group 2A elements typically
lose two electrons to become cations with a charge of +2.
(f) In forming an ion, a sodium atom (1s22s22p63s1) completes its valence shell by adding one elec- tron to filI its 3s shell (k22s22p63s2).
(g) The elements of Group 6A typically react by ac- cepting two electrons to become anions with a charge of -2.
(h) With the exception of hydrogen, the octet rule applies to all elements in periods 1,2, and 3.
(i) Atoms and the ions derived from them have very similar physical and chemical properties.
3.18 How many electrons must each atom gain or lose to acquire an electron configuration identical to the noble gas nearest to it in atomic number? (a) Li (b) Cl (c) P (d) Al (e) Sr (f) S (e) Si (h) O
3.19 Show how each chemical change obeys the octet rule. (a) Lithium forms Li* (b) Oxygen forms O Show how each chemical change obeys the octet rule. (a) Hydrogen forms H- (hydride ion) (b) Aluminum forms Al3+
3,2L Write the formula for the most stable ion formed by each element. (a) Mg (b) F (c) (d) s (e) K (I)
3.22 Why is Li- not a stable ion? 3.23 Predict which ions are stable:
(a) I- (b) Se2+ (c) Na* (d) 52- (e) tr12+ (fl Ba8+ 3,24 Predict which ions are stable:
(a) Br2- (b) C4- (c) Ca* (d) Ar* (e) Na* (I) Cs*
a
3.25 Why are carbon and silicon reluctant to foil bonds?
3.26 Table 3.2 shows the following ions of co14m and Cu2*. Do these violate the octet rule?
Section 3.3 How Do We Name Anions and Cations? 5.27 Answer true or false.
(a) For Group 1A and Group 2A elements,fte of the ion each forms is simply the nare element followed by the word ion; for Mg2* is named magnesium ion.
(b) H+ is named hydronium ion, and H is hydride ion.
(c) The nucleus of H* consists of one proton neutron.
(d) Many transition and inner transition form more than one positively charged irn I
(e) In naming metal cations with two diffemed charges, the suffix -oas refers to the ion a charge of + 1 and -ic refers to the ion wift charge of +2.
(f) Fe3* may be named either iron(III) ion or (g) The anion derived from a bromine atom is
bromine ion. (h) The anion derived from an oxygen atomis
named oxide ion. (i) HCO; is named hydrogen carbonate ion- .
0) The prefrx bi- in the name "bicarbonate'im indicates that this ion has a charge of -2-
(k) The hydrogen phosphate ion has a charge and the dihydrogen phosphate ion has a charge of +2.
(l) The phosphate ion is PO3a-. (m) The nitrite ion is NOz , and the nitrate
ion is NO3-. (n) The carbonate ion is CO32-, and the
carbonate ion is HCO3-.
3.28 Name each polyatomic ion. (a) HCO; (b) NO; (c) SOr'- (d) HSO4- (e) HzPOa-
Section 3.4 What Are the Two Major Types
participating in the bond acquires an outer<{ electron configuration matching that of the{ gas nearest to it in atomic number. I
(b) Atoms that lose electrons to achieve a filled t valence shell become cations and form ionic bonds with anions.
of Chemical Bonds? : 3.29 Answer true or false. j
(a) According to the Lewis model of bondi.g, d bond together in such a way that each atom {
AI Br
,-.-r lll - '-' - -----'--- - - -'
-
3.87
3.86
3.88 i-'
3.89
(e) HzO and NH3 are polar molecules, but CHa is nonpolar.
(f) In methanol, CH3OH, the O-H bond is more polar than the C-O bond.
(g) Dichloromethane, CH.zCl2,is polar, but tetrachlo- romethane, CCla, is nonpolar.
(h) Ethanol, CHBCH2OH, the alcohol of alcoholic bev- erages, has polar bonds, has a net dipole, and is a polar mo1ecule.
Both CO2 and SO2 have polar bonds. Account for the fact that CO2 is nonpolar and SO2 is polar.
Consider the molecule boron trifluoride, BF3. (a) Write a Lewis structure for BF3. (b) Predict the F-B-F bond angles using the
VSEPR model. (c) Does BF3 have polar bonds? Is it a polar
molecule?
Is it possible for a molecule to have polar bonds and yet have no dipole? ExPlain.
Is it possible for a molecule to have no polar bonds and yet have a dipole? ExPlain.
In each case, tell whether the bond is ionic, polar co- valent, or nonpolar covalent. (a) Brz (b) BrCI (c) HCI (d) SrFz
3.90
- (e) SiHa (0 CO G) N, G) CsCl
3.91 Account for the fact that chloromethane, CH3CI, which has only one polar C-Cl bond, is a polar mol- ecule, but carbon tetrachloride, CCla, which has four polar C-Cl bonds, is a nonpolar molecule.
Chemical Csnnections 9.92 (Chemical Connections 3A) What are the three main
inorganic components of one dry mixture currently used to create sYnthetic bone?
3.93 (Chemical Connections 3B) Why is sodium iodide often present in the table salt we buy at the grocery store?
3.54 (Chemical Connections 38) What is a medical use of barium sulfate?
3.95 (Chemical Connections 38) What is a medical use of potassium permanganate?
3.96 (Chemical Connections 3A) What is the most preva- lent metal ion in bone and tooth enamel?
3.97 (Chemical Connections 3C) In what way does the gas nitric oxide, NO, contribute to the acidity of acid rain?
Additional Problems 3.98 Explain why argon does not form either (a) ionic
bonds or (b) covalent bonds.
3.99 Knowing what you do about covalent bonding in com- pounds of carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen and given the fact that silicon isjust below carbon in the Periodic Table, phosphorus is just below nitrogen, and sulfur
Problems td.=
is just below oxygen, predict the molecular formula for the compound formed by (a) silicon and chlorine' (b) phosphorus and hYdrogen, and (c) sulfur and hydrogen'
3.100 Use the valence-shell electron-pair repulsion model
to predict the shape of a molecule in which a cenhal atom is surrounded by frve regions of electron density-as, for example, in phosphorus pentaflue ride, PF5. (Hint: Use molecular models or if you do not have a set handy, use marshmallows or gum- drops and toothpicks.)
3.101 Use the valence-shell electron-pair repulsion model
to predict the shape of a molecule in which a central atom is surrounded by six regions ofelectron density, as, for example, in sulfur hexa-fluoride, SF6'
3.102 Chlorine dioxide, ClO2, is a yellow to reddish yellow gas at room temperature. This strong oxidizing agent is used for bleaching cellulose, paper pulp, and textiles and for water purifrcation. It was the gas used to kill anthrax spores in the anthrax- contaminated Hart Senate Office Building' (a) How many valence electrons are present
in ClO2? (b) Draw a Lewis structure for this molecule. (Hint:
The order of attachment of atoms in this molecule is O-CI-O. Chlorine is a third-period element, and its valence shell may contain more than eight electrons.)
3.103 Using the information in Figure 2.16, estimate the H-O and H-S distances (the atom-atom dis- tances) in H2O and H2S, respectively.
3.104 Arrange the single covalent bonds within each set in order of increasing PolaritY. (a) C-H, O-H, N-H (b) C-H, C-Cl, C-I (c) C-C, C-O, C-N
3.105 Consider the structure ofVitamin E shown below, which is found most abundantly in wheat germ orl sunflower, and safflower oils:
H.C"L Hz "-q'"--g-"-?', H2 ?t' Ez !:' Hz !:' ,""-i-a-'c-o-?-c-cic-cH-a-cic'cH-( -c- -cH-i H3C H2 H2 H2 H2 i' H, CE3HrC
Viramin tr
(a) Identify the various types ofgeometries present in each central atom usingVSEPR theory-
(b) Determine the various relative bond angles as- sociated with each central atom usingVSEPR theorY.
(c) Which is the most polar bond tu lifamin E? (d) Would you predict Vitamin E to be polar or
nonpolar?
Nitrousoxidedissolvesinfats.Thegasisaddedunderpressure lo .rt, of whipped topping' When the valve is opened' the gas
""p."at, ttrus
"*prnding (whipping) the topping and forcing it out
ofthe can.
(a) How many valence electrons are present in a mol- 3'81 ecule of N2O?
(b) Write two equivalent contributing structures for
this molecule. The connectivity in nitrous oxide is
N-N-O. (c) Exptain why the following is not an acceptable
contributing structure:
tN-N:0
Section 3.10 How Do We Predict Bond Angles in Covalent Molecules?
3.79 Answer true or false' (a) The letters VSEPR stand for valence-shell
electron-Pair rePulsion'
(b) In predicting bond angles about a central atom in a covalent molecule, the VSEPR model considers
only shared electron pairs (electron pairs involved
in forming covalent bonds)' (c) The VSEPR model treats the two electron pairs
r ofa double bond as one region ofelectron density I und the three electron pairs ofa triple bond as I one region ofelectron densitY'
(d) In carbon dioxide, O:C:O, carbon is sur- rounded by four pairs ofelectrons and the
VSEPR model predicts 109'5" for the O-C-O bond angle.
(e) For a central atom surrounded by three regions of
electron density, the VSEPR model predicts bond
angles of l-20'. (f) The geometry about a carbon atom surrounded by
three regions ofelectron density is described as
trigonal Planar' (g) For a central atom surrounded by four regions of
electron density, the VSEPR model predicts bond
angles of360"/4 : 90''
(h) For the ammonia molecule, NH3, theVSEPR model predicts H-N-H bond angles of 109'5''
(i) For the ammonium ion, NHa+, theVSEPR model predicts H-N-H bond angles of l'09'5''
0) The VSEPR model applies equally wellto cova- lent compounds ofcarbon, nitrogen, and oxygen'
(k) In water, H-O-H, the oxygen atom forms cova- lent bonds to two other atoms, and therefore' the
VSEPR model predicts an H-O-H bond angle of 180".
(l) Ifyou fail to consider unshared pairs ofvalence electrons when you use the VSEPR model' you
will arrive at an incorrect prediction' (m) Given the assumptions of the VSEPR model' the
onlybond angles it predicts for compounds ofcarbon'
nitrogen, urd o*yg".t are 109'5', 120', and 180''
State the shape of a molecule whose central atom is
surrounded bY: (a) T$o regions ofelectron density
(b) Three regions ofelectron density
(c) Four regions ofelectron density
Hydrogen and oxygen combine in different ratios to
for* rirO (water) and IIro, (hydrogen peroxide)' (a) How many valence electrons are found in H2O? In
HzO2?
(b) Draw Lewis structures for each molecule in part (a). Be certain to show all valence electrons'
(c) Using the VSEPR model, predict th9 bgnd angles
about the oxygen atom in water and about each
oxygen atom in hYdrogen Peroxide'
Hydrogen and nitrogen combine in different ratios
toform three compounds: NH3 (ammonia), NzHa (hydrazine), and N2H2 (diimide)'
(a) How many valence electrons must the Lewis
structure of each molecule show?
(b) Draw a Lewis structure for each molecule'
(c) Predict the bond angles about the nitrogen
atom(s) in each molecule'
Predict the shape of each molecule'
(a) CHa G) PHB (c) CHFg (d) SO2 (e) SOs (0 CCIzF2 G) Ntt, ft) PCls Predict the shaPe ofeach ion.
(a) NOz- &) NHa* (c) Cos'-
Section 3.11 How Do We Determine lf a Molecule ls Polar? 3.85 Answer true or false.
(a) To predict whether a covalent molecule is polar or
nonpolar, you must know both the polarity of each
bond and the geometry (shape) of the molecule'
(b) A molecule may have two or more polar bonds
and still be nonPolar' (c) A1I molecules with polar bonds are polar'
(d) If water were a linear molecule with an H-O-H bond angle of 180", water would be a nonpolar
molecule.
104 ChaPter 3 Chemical Bonds
8.78 Nitrous oxide, N2O, Iaughing gas, is a colorless' nontoxic, tasteless, and odorless gas' It is used as an inhalation anesthetic in dental and other surger-
ies. Because nitrous oxide is soluble in vegetable
oils (fats), it is used commercially as a propellant in whiPPed toPPings.
; d
3.80
3.82
3.83.ry
alloqs ocualB^ slr 'puocos oq+ o+ paFo^uoc ur suorlcalo o11r+ uEq+ ororu aABr{ uaSo.rp(q 1,uec ,(q/A
sr oJn+cnr+s Surlnqrrluoc +sr$ aql aol{ s.&\orre pa^rnc esolncololu.reloduou oJB qcrql( pue ,solncolour relod Jo asn oql dq zuoqs pue eOCH 'uot aleuoq.reelq or{} arg asoq+Jo tplq6..alncalou rlrga roJ arn+cnrls sraql
roJ sorn+cnr+s 8ur1nqr.r1uoc elqeldacce ozrr+ o+rrd\ gl.g e r$ErC .puoq e1dr.r1 e ureluoc qc€o (zN) ue8o.4ru .arueuosau sl ]eqM 6'€ uolpas puB'(NCH) aprue,(c ueSo;pdq'(zHzC) eualdlecy
Q:q:Q :olncalou ouozo uB JoJ aJnlcnJ+s 8ur1nqr.r1uoc
elqeldacce ue +ou sr Suuvrollog eq1 ,(qrrr ureldxg (e) 'ouozo ur e13ue puoq O-O-O
eq1 prpard'sa.rn1cn.r1s Surlnquluoc .rno.{ uo poseg (p) 'puocas oql
o+ pouaauoc eq,{eur soJnlcnJls 8ur1nqr.r1uoc .rnod Jo lsru- aq+ 1t\or{ s1v\orr€ pa^rnc Jo osn aq} ,(q .uoqg 1c;
'Surpuoq yo uralled erues oq+ seq qceo leql ueoru o^t'se.rn1cm1s 8ur1nqr.r1 -uoc +uolelrnbe dg 'sa.rn1cn.r1s 8ur1nqr.r1uoc .rnod ur luese.rd eq deur 1eq1 seS.reqc e,ule8au ro alr+
-rsod due aoqs o ur€lroc ag 'ouozo Jo.tr saJnlcnr+s Surlnqr-r1uoc ocueuosor 1ua1e,[nbe o.e\l olrq\A (q)
ealncaloul auozo rrB JoJ oJnlcru+s srrrrel alqeldacce ue ur luese.rd aq lsnw suoJlcala acua1e,r.{uetu .troH (B)
'luelearnbe arB spuoq o-o q?oq puB o-o-o sr sluole orllJo
dlr,ulceuuoc eq1 'elncelour ouozo rre uI ropo lua8und cr+srro?cBrBqc B qllr!\ se8 enlq olqBlsrm ue sr'8o'euoz6 LL.g
'sc (p) slca (c)8os (q) zos (e) 'spunoduroc +uale^oc d.reurq asoq+ oureN
'opr.rolqcer+o+ uoqrec sI IICC roJ oru€u oqJ (3) 'aprurorq ue8updq sI rgH roJ orueu aqJ G)
'apHo uoqrec sI oc roJ aru€u oqJ (a) 'aplxorp uoqr€c s1 263 roy ourBu orIJ (p)
'aprronurp JnJIns sr,,{S ,oJ oruEu oqJ (c) 'lualualo e,ule8au
-or+cala ssol oq+ uaql puB luoulalo ez\I1e8euo.r1cele oJoru oql lsJg:rapJo srq+ ur porueu e.re punod
-Iuoc luole^oc d.reurq B ur s(uolBJo saddl orrLl oqJ (q) 'sruo+B Jo
spuDl o^\l sureluoc punoduroc luale^oc d"reurq y 1e; 'osIBJ ro anJ+ Jo.ll\suv vl.g
cspunoduro) ]uale^o) fu eur g arueN a^A oc i\AoH g'€ uotpes
suor+colo ;o s.rred poreqsun o^\+ pue spuoq a18urs o^\L (e)
:seq ue8dxo qcrqa, ur punoduroc lualeloc B Jo oJn+rnJls srl\aT e
^ errl Ol- lspunoduroc luolelo, ur suor+colaJo srred
poJ€rlsun o1Y\l puE spuoq o.1lA+ e,req uo8,(xo seop z(r1tr 66 suor+raloJo.rred pareqsun ouo pue puoq e1du1 ou6 (a)
suoJ+cola Jo .rred pe.reqs -un ouo pue'puoq olqnop euo'puoq e18uts eug 19
suorlcola go.[ed par€qsun auo pue spuoq a18urs oorqJ (e)
:seq ua8o.r1u qcrqaa. ur punodruoc luoleloc €Jo oJnlrnJls slr\oT € A{erg glFB
lspunodruoc +uol€Ao, ur suor+calo Jo .rred pa.reqs -un ouo pue spuoq oorql a^eq ue8o.rlu seop dq6 2gr3
asluauralo 1(or-puocos roJ {ro1( alnJ +o+co aq1 seop dqa.
'st 1eq;, aslloqs acuoIBA Jraq+ w suo.rlcale lq8re u€ql oJorrr oABq s+uoluala l\oJ-puocos l.uBc r(ut g
13
to (q)zN (3) *'HN G) _NC (a) zHzN (p) TH.N (c) szH (q)trg (e)
',(em auo dluo ur pa+cou -uoc oq uec suro+B orl+'asec qcea uI 'suor pue salnca
-1our 8uru,o11oJ aqlJo qceo JoJ ornlrnrls srlr\oT e trBrg et3 'o (q) uglcc (3) zoNll G) ,Icc (a)
oeHzc (p) zotHuc (c) 'Htc (q) tHN (e) 'olncolour
r{cBa ur suor+colo ocuaIBAJo roqrunu IB+o+ aql o+Bls ltt aarnlcnJls slr\oT € pue'e1nur,ro; I€rnlcruls B
'e1nur.ro3: relncalotu B uoo^\1aq acuoJoJlrp aq+ sr +eql1tr GlB 'IC'C G) OZHC (o) 8.tg (p) 'Hto (c) zttzc (q) tIIc (e)
'punoduroc luol€Aoc qceo roJ arnlcnJ+s sr-&orl B ir,rerg Cffi zspqos
ore qcrqil\ lspmbq are qcrqd\ lernleledural rrroor lB sese8 e.re s+uotuola cruo+erp qa1tl7y\ (U
'sluaruola crruo+Brp osorllJo r{cBo JoJ sarnlDnr}s svl\oT 1(Ero (Bj
's+ualualo cllrrolB -rp uo^as arB aJoq+ +eql 1t\es or!! 'gg'u uor+ros cI sE 3
epuoq olqnop v (q) ;puoq e1dFr1 y 1c1 lpuoq ey8urs y 1e,p
,UE 'r{cea JoJ aJn+cnJ+s slr\aT arn
gl.g 'ruolB aurruorq E (B) uoo.r\+aq acuoro#rp aql sr lBr{]l[ gtr.E
zN (l) 8uc (e) z,qc (q) 8,{8 (e)
e(solncolow olqels arE asoql Jo IIB lou) alru +o+co oq1 deqo lou saop
+eql urol€ rre a^€q salncaloru 3ur.la.o11o3 aq+Jo qcrr{1,\ gl.g 'uro1e ue8o.r1ru € (c) puB'uro1e uo8dxo uB (q)'urolB uoq
-rec raqloue (e) ol puoq alqnop e dq papuoq sr tuole uoq -.rEc B qcrq.^a ur olncololu E JoJ oJnlcrlJ+s sr.^aaT e .r\Erc 6L.g
aolqB+s +ou uor srql sr dql4.Ilaqs ro+no alelduroc B sErI +eO uor orl;, IL.g
suor+coIo 3o s.rred parBqsun o.u} puB puoq alqnop ouo (q)
€01. sualqord
:sr lEtllll ,Ef'lE O (a) rs (p) C (c) .{ (q) N (B)
eluollleJa gJBa _B ,(q peuuo;.{11eru.rou ore spuoq luoleloa,{ueru.u.o11 g1g
oN (3) iHzc (p) zdeg (c)
l0Z: Chapter 3 Chemical Bonds
3.44 Write the formula for the ionic compound formed from the following pairs of ions: (a) Iron(II) ion and chloride ion (b) Calcium ion and hydroxide ion (c) Ammonium ion and phosphate ion (d) fin(Il) ion and fluoride ion
3.45 Which formulas are not correct? For each that is not cor:rect, write the correct formula. (a) Ammonium phosphate; (NH)2POa (b) Barium carbonate; Ba2CO3 (c) Aluminum sulfide; A12S3 (d) Magnesium sulfrde; MgS
3.46 Which formulas are not correct? For each that is not correct, write the correct formula. (a) Calcium oxide; CaO2 (b) Lithium oxide;LiO (c) Sodium hydrogen phosphate; NaHPOa (d) Ammonium nitrate; NH4NOS
Section 3.6 How Do We Name lonic Compounds? 3.47 Answer true or false.
(a) The name of a binary ionic compound consists of the name of the positive ion followed by the name of the negative ion.
(b) In naming binary ionic compounds, it is necessary to state the number of each ion present in the compound.
(c) The formula of aluminum oxide is Al2O3. (d) Both copper(Il) oxide and cupric oxide are
acceptable names for CuO. (e) The systematic name for Fe2O3 is iron(Il) oxide. (f) The systematic name for FeCO3 is iron carbonate. (g) The systematic name for NaH2POa is sodium di-
hydrogen phosphate. (h) The systematic name for I$HPO4 is dipotassium
hydrogen phosphate. (i) The systematic name for Na2O is sodium oxide. (j) fne systematic name for PCl3 is potassium
chloride. (k) The formula of ammonium carbonate is NHaCO3.
3.4!t Potassium chloride and potassium bicarbonate are = used as potassium dietary supplements. Write the
formula of each compound. 3.49 Potassium nitrite has been used as a vasodilator and
as an antidote for cyanide poisoning. Write the for- mula of this compound.
3.50 Name the polyatomic ion(s) in each compound. (a) Na2SO, (b) KNO3 (c) CszCOs (d) NH4OH (e) I(zHPOa
3.51 Write the formulas for the ions present in each compound. (a) NaBr (b) FeSO, (c) Mgs(POJz (d) KH2PO4 (e) NaHCO, (fl Ba(NOr),
3.d;2 Name these ionictompounds:-- (a) NaF ft) MgS (d) BaCl, (g) Srs(Porz
(c) Al2O3 (e) Ca(HSOs)z (f) KI (h) Fe(OH)z (i) NaHzPOa
0) Pb(CHaCOO), (k) BaHz G)(NHr,HPO4 3.53 Write formulas for the following ionic compounds:
(a) Potassium bromide (b) Calcium oxide (s) Mercury(Il) oxide (d) Copper(Il) phosphate (e) Lithium sulfate (0 Iron(III) sulfrde
3.54 Write formulas for the following ionic compounds: (a) Ammonium hydrogen sulfite (b) Magnesium acetate (c) Strontium dihydrogen phosphate (d) Silver carbonate (e) Strontium chloride (f) Barium permanganate
Section 3.7 What ls a Covalent Bond? 3.55 Answer true or false.
(a) A covalent bond is formed behareen hnro atoms whose difference in electronegativity is less than 1.9.
(b) If the difference in electronegativity between two atoms is zero (they have identical electronega- tivities), then the two atoms will not form a cova- lent bond.
(c) A covalent bond formeil by sharing two electrons is called a double bond.
(d) In the hydrogen molecule (Hz), the shared pair of electrons completes the valence shell of each hydrogen.
(e) In the molecule CHa, each hydrogen has an elec- tron configuration like that ofhelium and carbon has an electron configuration like that ofneon.
(f) In a polar covalent bond, the more electronega- tive atom has a partial negative charge (6-) and the less electronegative atom has a partial posi- tive charge (6+).
(g) These bonds are arranged in order ofincreasing polarity C-H < N-H < O-H.
(h) These bonds are arranged in order ofincreasing polarity H-F < H-Cl < H-Br.
(i) A polar bond has a dipole with the negative end located at the more electronegative atom.
0) In a single bond, two atoms share one pair of electrons; in a double bond, they share two pairs ofelectrons; and in a triple bond, they share three pairs of electrons.
(k) The Lewis structure for ethane, C2H6, must shod! eight valence electrons.
0) The Lewis structure for formaldehyde, CH2O, must show 12 valence electrons.
(m) The Lewis structure for the ammonium ion, NHa+, must show nine valence electrons.
(n) Atoms of third-period elements can hold more than eight electrons in their valence shells.
uor olBueSu€tuJad puB uor unrpos (p) uor aleqdsoqd Pue uor umrcIBC (c)
uor aprrolqc PuB uor urnrr€g (q) uor aprxo-rp.{q pu€ uor (I[)uorl (B)
:suorJo srrcd 3urmo11o3 oql tuorJ pauroJ punoduroc oql roJ BInwroJ oql ollr,^A 87'8
ts'IV (") tc"s (P) ozsc (c) t.{8w (q) sBc (e)
lspunoduroc osoql ur uor r{Dea uo e8;eqc aql sr leqfl\ Z"E' 'o+e+s prlos
aql ur aprrolqc unrpos Jo ornlcruls oq+ oqrrcsoo lt'g
uor aprxorpdH (q) uor oPIxO (c)
uor aPuoIr{C (B) :suoru€ Surrrtol
-IoJ ot{l pue suor pBaI osaq+ Jo qcBo uoa'^alaq paruroJ punodruoe or{1 roJ BInuuoJ oq} olrrd['suor +7qd pue
*)qa *ol o", pn"1 '1e1aur uorlrsuerl e 1ou q8noqllv 07'8 ue8dxo Pue urnrsau8Bl [ (o)
oulroFlc puB umrreg (p) ourrolqc puE wnurlunlv (a) ue8dxo pue unrpos (q1 aurruorq pue urnpos (B)
'sluauraloJo .ued qcea rrroq paruroJ punoduroc cruor aql JoJ €InurroJ € alrrlv[ 68'8
zaC
+)I
troc z€C
+IT
HO-r'oa.'os-toNzO'ouINrg
:PoruroJ sPunod * -ruoc oq+ roJ s€InurroJ Sury-rr"r dq peqc aq1 e1a1dtuo3 88'8
'zozegsr aprxo unrreqJo €InruroJ eq1 'e"roJ -e.req1 i-.g sr uor oplxo pue'*.eg sr uor IunrJeg (r)
'zosed sr aprxo (III)uorrJo ElnruroJ aqJ, (q) 'SIV sI opgFs runurunlBJo elnurroJ arIJ (3)
'HO€C sr eprxo"rpdq tunrclB' Jo €InuiloJ oqJ G) 'szBN sI opglns unrpos Jo elnruroJ ar{,I (o)
'aurJolqc Jo llaqs acuoF^ oql o1 urnrpos Jo Iloqs ocuol€̂ aql uro4 parraJsuBr+ sr uoJlcala euo
'surole ourrolqc puE runrpos urorJ ISeN SururroJ uI (p) uelee-r8
ro 6'1 ,(1a1euflxo"rdde sr sruole o-1(l uaoaloq ,ty,rrle8euo.rlcala ur ocuoraJJrp oq+ Jr uuoJ IIua
puoq cruor uB letll des e-la,'eurlaprnE qEno"r e sy 1c; 'dl,rt1e8euo.r+cala ra.l oI
Jo ruo+€ eq1 o1 d1-t'qe8euo.rlcele leq8rq 3o urole oql uro4 suoJ+cola ocuole^ oJoru ro ouoJo roJsuBrl
oql trq swroJ sruole o^q uoa/4oq puoq 'ruor
uV (q) 'suor ar[1e8au pue arrrTSOd
Jo uorleurquoc eq1 dq pourroJ sr puoq cruor uY (B) 'osI€J ro onrl ra.^asrrv l/8'8
epuo8 )luol ue sl ]eqM s'E uolpas
lol. suolqoid
d-c (c)IC-S (o rg-c (B) 'aruor ro'lualerroa
.re1od'1ue1e,roc leloduou sB puoq qcee '$rsse13 53 N-C (c)TT-C (q)IC-C (e)
'cruor.ro'1ua1
-e,roc relod'1ue1e.toc .reloduou s€ puoq qcee 't;1sse13 99t o-c (r)3-C (q)N-C (e)
7',.re1od 1see1 eq;.
i.relod lsotu oq+ sr spuoq asat[+Jo qrlq-& tt3 o pu€ H (3) s pue d (I) S puB c (o)
rg pu€ IC (p) o puB C (c) o puB N (q) Ic pu€ H (B)
:stred Sur,LrolloJ aqlJo qr€o uoolqoq puoq lualB^o' e In poglqs suorlcala Surpuoq atp or€ tuole q'q'^a preAo[ gg"C
.{roc(p) Nroc(e) sroo(q) Icrod(e) 1,(1rru1eBauo.r1ca1e
re8.re1 eq1 seq.rred qceo ur luaruala qclqrrr'e1qe; crporrod or{+ ur suorlrsod e.tr1e1e'r rroql uro4 8uppn1' E5E
6alqEr crporrad atll Jo /(or B ssoJ,B 1q31'r o1 15a1 uro'r; Suro8
".n"rr.r.,(11e.reue8 dT.trle8euo*1ae1o saop dr111 IgE
ialq€J atporrod eq13o (dnol8) urunloc € dn Suro8 eseereui (lereue8 dl,ule8euol1ce1a seop '(q6
'olqBJJ crpolrad oqlJ9 urunloc e ul utoll(xl o1 do1 uror; sas€orcur dlle.reua8 d1'ule8auorpelg 1oX
'alqeJ crporrod oqlJo porlad e sso'rce 1q!rr o1 }JoI urorJ sos€orcur,t1p-reue8 .'{1llr1e3euor1ao1g tul
'snolcnu otll lro+ suo4colo aruol€a aq+ Jo acu€+slp or{1 puB aars[P
r€olcnu oql qloq uo spuedep '(1r'u1e8auorpa6ffi 'luarualo aar1e8ro
-orlralo lseol aql sr 'leu.roc ge1-"reddn eq1 w d -o.rpdq iluourela e.l.rle8euorlcalo lsoru oql sr rolqqf crporrad aqlJo rouJoc 1q8r"r--raddn eq1 ur'auulo15 6
,tpedo.rd crpor.red e sr d1'ule8euo'4mg{,tS .1slar.
crtuole qlr^r soseorrur dlp.raue8 d1t'trle8auo'4ce1g *$ raqrnu
crurole qlr^L sos€orcur dlp;aue8 dlarle8auo'q'mg pp 'urolB roqloue ql!s. PEI
[€cruaqc e ur sorBr{s }r suorleola arll roJ uoflJErl -+€ slurolB uB JO aJns€aur e sr '(+Irrrle8euo'rrJalE fiilfll
'+uoleloc dlPnsn sr urflS uao^\+aq puoq ar{+'ourquroc slelaruuou oa1 uaq6 ffi
'IElaurm B pu€ I€lalu B uoalrqaq ulroJ ol pual spuoq 3Iq flil
'aIqBJ crporrod orpP aprs lq8u aql uo sluorualo uaa.ry\+aq turoJ o+ @
spuoq luale^oc pue 'e1qe;, rrpouod or{1Jo apF gEl aq+ uo slualuola uaoalaq urroJ 01 puol spuoq qrl #t
'spuoq lualeaoc urroJ sllaqs oE[E'r' pallg a^arqc€ o+ suor+cola arerls lBtp suryfltl
'suogerqlIAsFl cruor ruroJ puE suorue auocaq s[aqs oEICf,
pallg o^aqr€ ol suor+colo qe8 1eq1 sttEls mryi

Get help from top-rated tutors in any subject.
Efficiently complete your homework and academic assignments by getting help from the experts at homeworkarchive.com