|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1384
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
90
[0], given: 10
|
Many state legislatures are considering proposals to the [#permalink]
 04 Jun 2008, 16:29
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (01:30) wrong based on 0 sessions
Many state legislatures are considering proposals to the effect that certain policies should be determined not by the legislature itself but by public referenda in which every voter can take part. Critics of the proposals argue that the outcomes of public referenda would be biased, since wealthy special-interest groups are able to influence voters views by means of television advertisements.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the critics argument?
(A) Many state legislators regard public referenda as a way of avoiding voting on issues on which their constituents are divided.
(B) During elections for members of the legislature, the number of people who vote is unaffected by whether the candidates run television advertisements or not.
(C) Proponents of policies that are opposed by wealthy special-interest groups are often unable to afford advertising time on local television stations.
(D) Different special-interest groups often take opposing positions on questions of which policies the state should adopt.
(E) Television stations are reluctant to become associated with any one political opinion, for fear of losing viewers who do not share that opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 793
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
82
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
04 Jun 2008, 17:09
(A) Many state legislators regard public referenda as a way of avoiding voting on issues on which their constituents are divided. [What many legislators regard - irrelevant]
(B) During elections for members of the legislature, the number of people who vote is unaffected by whether the candidates run television advertisements or not. [Election for members – not discussed – eliminate it]
(C) Proponents of policies that are opposed by wealthy special-interest groups are often unable to afford advertising time on local television stations. [Hold it]
(D) Different special-interest groups often take opposing positions on questions of which policies the state should adopt. [What different special-interest groups often take is irrelevant – eliminate it]
(E) Television stations are reluctant to become associated with any one political opinion, for fear of losing viewers who do not share that opinion. [What television stations reluctant about – irrelevant]
Answer: C
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2998
Followers: 48
Kudos [?]:
389
[0], given: 210
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
04 Jun 2008, 17:11
Another C. Goalsnr, what is the source of these questions today ? goalsnr wrote: Many state legislatures are considering proposals to the effect that certain policies should be determined not by the legislature itself but by public referenda in which every voter can take part. Critics of the proposals argue that the outcomes of public referenda would be biased, since wealthy special-interest groups are able to influence voters views by means of television advertisements.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the critics argument?
(A) Many state legislators regard public referenda as a way of avoiding voting on issues on which their constituents are divided. <-- I find this irrelevant
(B) During elections for members of the legislature, the number of people who vote is unaffected by whether the candidates run television advertisements or not. <-- if anything it weakens the argument
(C) Proponents of policies that are opposed by wealthy special-interest groups are often unable to afford advertising time on local television stations. <-- Bingo. If the opponents cant afford counter TV adverts then the argument is strengthened.
(D) Different special-interest groups often take opposing positions on questions of which policies the state should adopt. <-- Irrelevant.
(E) Television stations are reluctant to become associated with any one political opinion, for fear of losing viewers who do not share that opinion.<-- Weakens
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 1612
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
53
[0], given: 2
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
04 Jun 2008, 18:16
another C from yours truly
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
27
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
04 Jun 2008, 21:44
I vote for C
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 130
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
04 Jun 2008, 22:45
I also came up with C, but I've started to see a trend of some sort with these CR questions. Your explanations are helping me see that you really need to stick "close" to the main text. Don't let your mind stray too far. Are you guys seeing this too? For those of you doing well in general with CR, do you have that same sort of logic?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 418
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
46
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
04 Jun 2008, 22:56
Yes C says that Proponents of policies that are opposed by wealthy special-interest groups MAY BE LOSE if DO NOT AFFORD advertising.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1384
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
90
[0], given: 10
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
06 Jun 2008, 06:54
Goalsnr, what is the source of these questions today ?
>>>> BSD, this question is from sets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1384
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
90
[0], given: 10
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups [#permalink]
06 Jun 2008, 06:55
OA is C
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: CR-special-interest groups
[#permalink]
06 Jun 2008, 06:55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
