AR15J wrote:
Hi Expert,
Please explain the cause of rejecting the choice B. I read the existing post but am not convinced with the reason of rejecting choice B.
I got this question wrong, but I can explain why B is wrong here.
Argument structure is as follows:
In swiss -
1. Constitution can be initiated by referendum.
2. referendum should have--
i - Issue on which referendum is based should be 18 months long.
ii - 100K Signatures.
Conclusion - Swiss takes long time to amend a constitution.
To amend a constitution, time required is - Issue should be
18 months long + time reqd for a citizen to take 100K signatures.
If we say that it is easy to take 100K signatures, time reqd for overall process is likely to decrease. This is opposite of the conclusion.
Later part of option B i.e.
for a constitutional amendment within 18 months. is a trap. It uses the phrase mentioned in argument but it is not relating to the argument.
Why u guys are discussing "Swiss takes long time to amend a constitution". Nowhere it is written that Swiss government takes long time to amend constitution.
The sentence is "the Swiss government must be spending a lot of time amending the country's constitution." Which means a major portion of overall time (say in a year or 2 year or 5 year) of Swiss govt. is spent on constitution amendment. It doesn't mean that they are taking long time.