The State Constitution bans the legislature from reducing the benefit package of the state and local workers during their employment, but it does allow improvement of the package. Thus, the governor’s veto power remains as the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program for recently hired public school teachers.
The author of the argument is assuming which of the following?
(A) The governor wants to reduce the benefit of the package
(B) The new pension program is not part of the benefit package
(C) The legislature supports the new pension program
(D) The governor will probably veto the new pension program
(E) The State Constitution permits the governor to reduce the benefit package of employees during their employment
Kindly justify the option you choose.. OA will be posted shortly..
Let's first understand the passage:
Information not relevant to the argument: legislature can't reduce the benefit package of the state and local workers during their employment
Premise: Legislature can improve the package of the state and local workers during their employment
Conclusion: the governor’s veto power remains as the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program for recently hired public school teachers.
So, legislature can improve the package of the workers. This also means they can chose not to improve the package.
Now, governor's veto is the only obstacle to pension enhancement -> there are no other obstacles -> legislature is no more an obstacle -> legislature has already passed or supports the pension enhancement.
This is what is given by option C.
Hope this helps
Let me know if further clarity is needed.
Attend the event this weekend to learn how to improve by up to 70 points in 25 days.
Free trial:Click here to start free trial (100+ free practice questions)
Free Session: September 14: Learn how to define your GMAT strategy, create your study plan and master the core skills to excel on the GMAT. Click here to attend.