Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 22 May 2017, 16:28

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The current administration and Congress have once again

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 276
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 60 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 00:37
10
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

40% (02:19) correct 60% (01:31) wrong based on 553 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.
B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities.
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university.
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget.

Good one..lets discuss it
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

The world is continuous, but the mind is discrete

If you have any questions
New!
Intern
Joined: 04 Jun 2008
Posts: 18
Location: Delhi, India
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 01:56
Pretty good!

IMO A.
If total spending will increase then criticism in first sentence of paragraph stands void. Thus weakening the conclusion.

For a while I was stuck between B and D, I beleive they are trap, rightly set up for people like me.
_________________

-Albert
My GMAT Preparation: http://albertrahul.blogspot.com/search/label/GMAT

SVP
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 1562
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 158 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 07:14
i went for B ...
Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2008
Posts: 158
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 11:09
The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

MAIN POINT : allocation of pell grants for next year's budget. correct response should show that current admin did not fail to increase to pell grants.pell grants are some pecentage of total budget. in that case if the budget for next year is less compared to this year.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.

B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities.
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university.
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget.

Director
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 754
Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 8

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 13:02
Argument:
Pell Grants are being reduced
Pell Grants improve access to higher education (and therefore middle class) for student
Concl:Without this access, the gap between classes widens hence grants should not be reduced

IMO A, since A is correct here since it shows actually access is provided somehow differently
Director
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 790
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 13:08
Conclusion (Subjective Opinion): The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget.

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget. [ This is good but nothing talks about education – eliminate it]

B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants. [ Hold it]
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities. [ After School programs not discussed – eliminate it]
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university. [ How much of pell’s grant is irreverent ]
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget. [Good one but does not provide any thing to argument – eliminate it]

Manager
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 112
Location: São Paulo
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 15:52
IMO it's B
If the neediest lack infomation about that grant, they never get it, and the gap between rich and poor would remain big.
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1444
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 16:44
B, explained by others.
Director
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 729
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2008, 19:32
vdhawan1 wrote:
The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.
B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities.
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university.
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget.

IMHO, The conclusion is since disadvantaged students can't have access to higher edu the gap between rich & poor continues to widen.
if A is true it will help students access higher edu.
Manager
Joined: 06 Feb 2008
Posts: 87
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2008, 07:02
i will go with B since if B is true culprit is not budget but awareness so it will weaken the arugement "due to lack of budget" gap between poor and rich is widening.

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 401
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 242 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2008, 02:53
vdhawan1 wrote:
The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.
B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities.
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university.
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget.

Good one..lets discuss it

A, B, and D may be correct answers.
I choose D because it the best among them. Although D only mention s15%, while we do not know HOW MUCH is enough.
B: only neediest! NO
A: Total spending on Pell grant ==> increase next year's budget ... do not know what happen next.
Intern
Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 38
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2008, 03:50
lexis wrote:
vdhawan1 wrote:
The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.
B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities.
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university.
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget.

Good one..lets discuss it

A, B, and D may be correct answers.
I choose D because it the best among them. Although D only mention s15%, while we do not know HOW MUCH is enough.
B: only neediest! NO
A: Total spending on Pell grant ==> increase next year's budget ... do not know what happen next.

It should be B.

Argument is => reduction in budgets will widen the gap between rich and poor. Choice B states - it is not reduction in budget but utilization of budget is widening the gap, hence it is the best choice.

(A) - stimulus already states that next year budget will be reduced. Even if budget is increased next year, access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase only if budget is utilized.
(D) - iI find D to be supporting the conclusion. Only 15% cost of education is funded. If budgets are further reduced next year, students would be getting even lesser pie and hence gap between rich and poor will widen. Hence it supports are argument.

Cumic
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 401
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 242 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2008, 09:29
What is the OA?
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 401
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 242 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2008, 12:01
lexis wrote:
What is the OA?
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 318
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2008, 17:20
I go with A

Let me know if my reasoning sound crazy to eliminate B )
in B
B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.

"neediest candidates" make small fraction of all the needy people , even if neediest people lack information about their eligibility , atleast some isome fraction of this underpriviledged group can still utilize the budget .
Intern
Joined: 25 May 2008
Posts: 20
Location: Menlo Park, CA
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2008, 17:28
I will go with A. What is the OA??!!
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 271
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2008, 18:41
A close call between B and D. I would opt for D cause even if the needy knew about Pell grants, they still had to fund 85% of their fees. This would discourage many from opting for it, even if grants were provided.
I didn't choose B cause there might be others who knew about Pell grants and took it, thus reducing the rich poor gap to an extent.
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1180
Followers: 438

Kudos [?]: 1603 [0], given: 4

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 04:51
vdhawan1 wrote:
The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.

The question is testing whether you confuse a subset with the whole set. Are Pell grants the only mechanism used by governments to help the disadvantaged pursue higher education? Or are there other programs? Perhaps the government will cut Pell grants, but fund new, equally effective programs. A) tells us that there are other programs besides Pell grants, and they are receiving increased funding.

That said, I do find the question a bit strange. What is the conclusion, after all? It seems the more important conclusion of the argument is that 'access to higher education for the disadvantaged is required to prevent the gap between rich and poor from widening, and to prevent straining the stability of our democracy'. None of the answer choices addresses this conclusion. There is an implication, of course, that 'cutting Pell grants will make it more difficult for the disadvantaged to pursue higher education', but I don't read that to be the main conclusion of the argument, as presented. Still, that's the conclusion addressed by the answer choices.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 169
Location: Vienna, Austria
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 06:43
friends-can someone pls come up with the OA ?

merci
SVP
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1522
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 816 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2008, 11:47
The argument's conclusion is: Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

I go for option D. This is because since the argument claims that no access to grand assistance will increase the gap between the rich and poor and that increasingly straining the stability of our democracy BECAUSE the poor will NOT be able to seek education. According to option D, the poor will still be unable to seek the education with the grand assistance because it covers less than 15% of the education fees. Avoiding this assistance will NOT CAUSE the straining because the straining will STILL OCCUR anyways should the grand assistance be continued., thus weakening the argument.
Re: The current administration and Congress have once again   [#permalink] 01 Jul 2008, 11:47

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 49 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Administrative 1 29 Jun 2015, 12:01
13 The administrative budget in the Central Valley school 7 20 Jan 2017, 07:14
At the beginning of 2004, Congress enacted a 15% 4 19 Nov 2014, 08:23
3 Since 1995, Congress has exempted oil companies that have 4 31 Mar 2015, 04:25
14 Congress is considering a "National Service" 12 10 Oct 2016, 14:03
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# The current administration and Congress have once again

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.