Political Candidate: Government subsidized prescription drug plans tha

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The conclusion, or ultimate position, of the political candidate is that older and disabled individuals should be offered drug coverage alternatives that, in contrast to plans built around individual choice, do not force them to gamble with their health. The first bold-faced statement is an observation that the candidate makes about the appeal of the choice-based plans; the use of the phrase "deceptively appealing" and the continuation of the argument makes it clear that the candidate views the appeal of these plans as unfortunate. The second bold-faced statement, that consumers cannot predict their future health needs, is an assertion that the candidate uses to support his ultimate position that alternative plans should be offered.

(B) This choice correctly states that the second bold-faced statement is a claim that the candidate uses as evidence to support his ultimate position. However, the first bold-faced statement is not an observation to which the candidate is ultimately opposed; it is his own observation that the current prescription drug plans are "deceptively appealing." His opposition is to the drug plans themselves, but that is not the observation made in the first statement.

(C) CORRECT. The first bold-faced statement, that coverage plans centered around choice are deceptively appealing, is an observation that the candidate acknowledges as true but unfortunate. The second bold-faced statement—that consumers cannot predict their future health needs—is an assertion that the candidate makes to support his ultimate position that alternative plans should be offered.

(D) This choice incorrectly states that the candidate argues against the observation that choice plans are deceptively appealing to numerous stakeholders. This is the candidate's own observation; though he does view the fact as unfortunate, one cannot argue against one's own observation. Moreover, the second bold-faced statement is not an observation; instead, it is a claim used to support the candidate's ultimate conclusion that alternative plans should be offered.

(E) This choice correctly states that the first bold-faced statement is an observation the candidate makes. However, the second bold-faced statement—that consumers cannot predict their future health needs—is not an assertion that the candidate opposes; instead, he uses this claim to support his ultimate position.