Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
The city council will certainly vote to approve the new [#permalink]
10 Sep 2005, 04:59
100% (02:31) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 3 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
The city council will certainly vote to approve the new downtown redevelopment plan, despite the objections of environmentalists. After all, most of the campaign contributions received by members of the city council come from real estate development firms, which stand to benefit from the plan.
Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the argument above?
(A) Several members of the city council receive sizable campaign contributions from environmental lobbying groups.
(B) Members of the city council are required to report the size and source of each campaign contribution they receive.
(C) Not every real estate development firm in the city will be able to participate in, and profit from, the new downtown redevelopment plan.
(D) The members of the city council have often voted in ways that are opposed to the interests of their campaign contributors.
(E) Some environmentalists have stated that the new downtown redevelopment plan might be environmentally sound if certain minor modifications are made.
:wall I chose A between A and D! I dont understand D at all! Pls someone explain the connection!
The assumption in the argument is that the city council members will vote according to the wishes or goals of who donated the most money to each council member's campaign.
D pretty much negates this assumption, thus weakening the argument.
The argument says the plan will CERTAINLY get approved, i.e. without a doubt. BUT, as D says, the council members have OFTEN voted in ways OPPOSED to the interests of those that contribute to the member's campaigns.