Some officials
both at the Treasury Department
and the Securities and Exchange Commission recently said in off-the-record conversations that it may be a good idea
to require that all large and highly leveraged banks should decrease their debt and should increase their asset base.In non-underling portion:
"both" is a bit compromised:
both X and Y: X and Y have to be grammatically and logically parallel. And X here is a prepositional phrase while Y is a noun..
In underlying portion:
"require" can be subjunctive, in this case it should follow the formula:
REQUIRE + THAT + BARE INFINITIVE (
REQUIRE + THAT + SHOULD/WILL/TO INFINITIVE is not acceptable) - for this reason, A is wrong.
Or "require" can be to-verb:
REQUIRE TO ...Quote:
(B) requiring that all large and highly leveraged banks decrease their debt and increase their asset base
I keep this one to compare with E: "it may be a good idea requiring" vs "it may be a good idea to require". I believe that the latter case wins. So eliminate B.
Quote:
(C) to require of all large and highly leveraged banks the decreasing of debt and an increase in their asset base
- "require of" is unidiomatic
Quote:
(D) requiring that all large and highly leveraged banks to decrease their debt and to increase their asset base
- use of "to" infinitive is a violation of "subjunctive formula".
Quote:
(E) to require all large and highly leveraged banks to decrease their debt and increase their asset base
"require to" is an acceptable form, and "to decrease" and "increase " are parallel.
Correct choice.