After months of investigation, the committee examining cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the nation's infrastructure determined that the risks were ___...

Let's begin by understanding the meaning of this sentence. We'll use our understanding of pause points and segment the sentence as shown - understanding and assimilating the meaning of each segment bit by bit!

Sentence Structure

• After months of investigation,
• the committee
• examining cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the nation's infrastructure
• determined
• that the risks were substantial [?] address these threats,

• lawmakers drafted emergency legislation
• requiring enhanced encryption protocols across all federal systems.

Understanding the Meaning

Let me start reading from the beginning to understand what's happening:

After months of investigation,
the committee examining cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the nation's infrastructure
determined that the risks were substantial

So the first part tells us:

• A committee spent months investigating cybersecurity problems
• They came to a conclusion: the risks were substantial (serious/significant)

This is where we have the blank: 'substantial [?] address these threats'

Let's look at the choices:

• A: colon and lowercase 'to'
• B: semicolon and lowercase 'to'
• C: period and capital 'To'
• D: no punctuation, just 'to'

To see what works here, let's read the rest and understand what it's saying!

'address these threats, lawmakers drafted emergency legislation requiring enhanced encryption protocols across all federal systems'

Now let's understand what this part is telling us:

• 'To address these threats'
  • This is explaining the PURPOSE - why something was done
  • 'These threats' refers back to the substantial risks the committee found

• 'lawmakers drafted emergency legislation'
  • Subject: lawmakers (different from the committee!)
  • Action: they drafted (wrote) emergency legislation

• 'requiring enhanced encryption protocols across all federal systems'
  • This describes what the legislation would do

So the complete picture is:

• First part: The committee determined risks were substantial
• Second part: To address those risks, lawmakers created new legislation

What do we notice about the structure here?

• 'The committee determined that the risks were substantial'
  • Has a subject (committee), verb (determined), and complete thought
  • This is a COMPLETE SENTENCE - it can stand on its own

• 'To address these threats, lawmakers drafted emergency legislation...'
  • Has a subject (lawmakers), verb (drafted), and complete thought
  • This is also a COMPLETE SENTENCE - it can stand on its own
  • It starts with a purpose phrase ('To address these threats')

So we have two completely separate sentences:

• They're about different groups (committee vs. lawmakers)
• They're about different actions (determining vs. drafting legislation)
• They're related in meaning, but grammatically they're independent thoughts

When you have two complete sentences, you need to separate them with proper punctuation. The clearest way is with a period.

The correct answer is C: substantial. To

This creates two separate sentences, which is exactly what we need since both parts express complete, independent thoughts.

GRAMMAR CONCEPT APPLIED

Separating Two Complete Sentences

When you have two complete thoughts that can stand alone as sentences (called independent clauses in grammar terms), you must separate them properly. Each complete thought needs:

• A subject (who or what is doing something)
• A verb (the action or state of being)
• A complete idea that makes sense on its own

How to separate them:

Option 1: Use a period and start a new sentence

• The storm caused massive flooding. Rescue teams worked through the night.
  • First sentence: complete thought about the storm
  • Second sentence: complete thought about rescue teams
  • Period clearly separates these two independent ideas

Option 2: Use a semicolon (when thoughts are very closely related and parallel)

• The experiment failed; the researchers redesigned their approach.
  • Both clauses are closely connected and similar in structure
  • Semicolon shows tight relationship

In our question:

• First complete sentence: 'After months of investigation, the committee examining cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the nation's infrastructure determined that the risks were substantial.'
  • Subject: the committee
  • Verb: determined
  • Complete thought: tells us what they concluded

• Second complete sentence: 'To address these threats, lawmakers drafted emergency legislation requiring enhanced encryption protocols across all federal systems.'
  • Subject: lawmakers
  • Verb: drafted
  • Complete thought: tells us what they did in response

Since these are two distinct complete thoughts about different subjects taking different actions, we need a period to separate them clearly. This prevents a run-on sentence and makes the logical flow easier to follow.