Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized for You
we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Track Your Progress
every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance
Practice Pays
we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
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:
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 23 Oct 2017, 07:13
2
3
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
45% (medium)
Question Stats:
65% (01:30) correct 35% (01:33) wrong based on 988 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
(A) Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.
(B) In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.
(C) The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.
(D) There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.
(E) The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Dec 2007, 09:56
I am going for B.
A. health cost is irrelevant
C. the statement did not mention the state law supercede local antismoking ordinances
D. sentiment among voters is irrelevant
E. fire hazard is irrelevant
If B were true, then it is misleading. Rural population who sign the petition won't be representative and won't have the valid opinion on it.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Dec 2007, 19:55
2
gregspirited wrote:
OA is E. Couldn;t understand why
As usual, after seeing the OA and falling back to each and every word in the argument. 'E' looks good.
P1 = In state, cities & towns have their own ordinances
P2 = New petion: name 'Statewide...' with question '...sign for statewide campaign'
P3 = Petition: ban smoking in retail & govern offices open to public.
EC = Petition is misleading to voters on what circumstances, as they understand it is as an local ordinance being extended to statewide
Possible solution: Look out for an option that brings out a local ordinance in place and bring out an element of uncertainity - what will happen to this local ordinance when the new statewide petition/ban is enforced.
Whether the new statewide will go hand in hand with the local or will it supersede it and phase it out.
Looks like I am lagging way behing in CR techiniques..need to catch up...
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 20 Oct 2010, 06:01
7
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.
B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.
C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.
D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.
E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.
_________________
Trying hard to achieve something unachievable now....
Originally posted by dkverma on 20 Oct 2010, 04:40.
Last edited by dkverma on 20 Oct 2010, 06:01, edited 1 time in total.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Oct 2010, 07:33
I don't get this question, and I definitely don't understand how E can be the answer. Is there an OE for this? I said B, which is the only one that makes a little sense to me. The petition is misleading to the people signing it because it bans smoking in retail establishments and government offices, but the people signing it don't have those things in their local areas. So they're signing something completely different than they think.
E seems totally irrelevant and out of scope.
dkverma wrote:
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.
B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.
C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.
D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.
E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Oct 2010, 10:01
1
Its between C and E.....
A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers - this strengthens the smoking ban.
B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public - even if there are only few retail establishments does not affect the ban
C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does - yes, what if the new law has restrictions which can affects non-smokers. this could be a problem which will make a voter think twice.
D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking - again strengthens the ban.
E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard - I don't know how to explain this. This also seems to be an answer, which I can't understand.
So, if E is the OA...please could an expert explain OR is there an OE???
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 22 Jun 2017, 06:58
4
13
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
(A) Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.
(B) In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.
(C) The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.
(D) There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.
(E) The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.
Question Code : VCR000806
Originally posted by eybrj2 on 05 May 2012, 03:47.
Last edited by hazelnut on 22 Jun 2017, 06:58, edited 2 times in total.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
05 May 2012, 04:06
The OA of this question has been very controversial, C vs E. I initially picked C, but after reading the question again and looking at other people's opinions, I changed my mind into E.
My understanding is like this. feel free to point out flaws.
Q: What misleads the voters to think that the petition is extended from the local ordinances?
C doesn't have anything that could mislead the voters. It is just a prediction that the state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances.
On the other hands, at the end of the passage, the author says that the petitions advocates a saes law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public. And E says that the state law doesn't change the non-smoking places determined by the local ordinances. Combining those two above, the state law bans smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices while the state law doesn't change non-smoking places determined by the local ordiances. This might make the voters to think that the petition is extended from the local ordinances.
I am not sure if I explained clearly. It's so hard to explain sth complicated in English, which is not my first language.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
16 Jun 2014, 04:57
1
1
Beyond700 wrote:
gregspirited wrote:
OA is E. Couldn;t understand why
As usual, after seeing the OA and falling back to each and every word in the argument. 'E' looks good.
P1 = In state, cities & towns have their own ordinances
P2 = New petion: name 'Statewide...' with question '...sign for statewide campaign'
P3 = Petition: ban smoking in retail & govern offices open to public.
EC = Petition is misleading to voters on what circumstances, as they understand it is as an local ordinance being extended to statewide
Possible solution: Look out for an option that brings out a local ordinance in place and bring out an element of uncertainity - what will happen to this local ordinance when the new statewide petition/ban is enforced. Whether the new statewide will go hand in hand with the local or will it supersede it and phase it out.
Looks like I am lagging way behing in CR techiniques..need to catch up...
If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that! The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy. Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING. Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough. Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Aug 2014, 08:25
eybrj2 wrote:
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers. B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public. C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does. D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking. E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.
What circumstances would misled readers assuming that the petition if approved would make the whole city anti-smoking zone (or extend the purview of the anti-smoking law). "C" highlights the the voters' concern saying that the new law would supersede the existing one, leading to stronger bans.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Aug 2014, 15:32
5
3
eybrj2 wrote:
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers. B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public. C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does. D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking. E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.
C. If local antismoking ordinances currently contains stronger bans than the state law does, signing for the petition will actually make the local banning smoking weaker, because local law is replaced by state law. Voters who sign for the petition will want to have stronger local banning smoking ordinances. So C, if exists, actually mislead the voters.
_________________
......................................................................... +1 Kudos please, if you like my post
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
12 Sep 2014, 02:24
This is a very good GMAT Prep question. Can experts please break the problem and explain the reasoning behind the question and procedure to find the correct answer?
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
18 Jun 2015, 23:37
In one state, all cities and most towns have anti-smoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide? B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public. C. The state law would supersede the local anti-smoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.
What would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide ?
Think it like this. I am a voter and have been asked if i would like to increase/improve the law n order situation across state. I say yes. What do i expect? I expect it to improve, not go down. Lets look at options: B Vs C: Lets think that B is true. If that is the case then though rural places that would come under the proposed law would be less compared to urban, there would be an overall increase in the area covered under the new law. So in a way there is increase in so to me this doesn't mislead. However C means that what i m voting for is not strong enough and that by replacing existing ordinance would compromise the current standard.
_________________
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
29 Oct 2016, 12:58
1
Top Contributor
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Purpose of the petition : is to make smoking illegal in public offices.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers. Out of scope as we are not discussing insurance premiums
B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public. This petition still serves its purpose
C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does. This option makes the petition meaning less - Correct
D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking. This makes the petition relevant
E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard. This statement talks about a subset of the application of the petition. This is the next best answer. _________________
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
03 Jan 2017, 04:48
my understanding of the stimulus is not very clear. Does the petition genuinely support statewide smoking restriction?Are the workers describing it accurately? If yes how the voters can be misled?
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
03 Jan 2017, 08:01
1
rulez161 wrote:
my understanding of the stimulus is not very clear. Does the petition genuinely support statewide smoking restriction?Are the workers describing it accurately? If yes how the voters can be misled?
Does the petition genuinely support statewide smoking restriction? The petition is for restricting smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Are the workers describing it accurately? The workers ask ONLY the following question: “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” It is not clarified what is meant by "statewide smoking restriction", i.e, the scope of restricted places (retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public) is not clear in the campaign.
Therefore if the existing local laws are more stringent (i.e. smoking is banned in more places, in addition to retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public), then implementation of the state law would be misleading because it would supersede the local laws, thereby making the smoking norms more lenient.
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A [#permalink]
Show Tags
24 Jun 2017, 19:24
such questions should be treated as special-type questions. In other words, the correct answer must answer what is being asked by the question. Here, test takers have to use logic senses, common senses, and gmat skills (especially, identify question type). The question seems to be a mixing question: logic, application, weaken, and assumption. (weaken and assumption can be combined into assumption)
We’re rolling out updates to our privacy features and policies in the coming weeks. You’ll have more control over your personal information and more detail on what information we...
The scale and depth of opportunities presented by the quickly evolving digital entertainment industry in India is astounding. India is an ideal market for new digital entrants. With a...
The scale and depth of opportunities presented by the quickly evolving digital entertainment industry in India is astounding. India is an ideal market for new digital entrants. With a...
close
65% (01:30) correct 
and falling back to each and every word in the argument. 'E' looks good.
