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
OA is D, and I keep arriving at - B
Logic Behind my choice: OA says that most of the council members vote against the lobby groups supporting them, then in that case it is also possible that some council members may be supported by environment-friendly lobbies. In that case the number of council members voting against their supporters will nullify
Can anyone plz lend a helping hand