The State Constitution bans the legislature from reducing the benefit

Question

The State Constitution bans the legislature from reducing the benefit package of the state and local workers during their employment, but it does allow improvement of the package. Thus, the governor’s veto power remains as the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program for recently hired public school teachers.

The author of the argument is assuming which of the following?

The author of the argument is assuming which of the following?

(A) The governor wants to reduce the benefit of the package

(B) The new pension program is not part of the benefit package

(C) The legislature supports the new pension program

(D) The governor will probably veto the new pension program

(E) The State Constitution permits the governor to reduce the benefit package of employees during their employment

egmat · Accepted Answer

Hi, Let's first understand the passage: Information not relevant to the argument: legislature can't reduce the benefit package of the state and local workers during their employment Premise: Legislature can improve the package of the state and local workers during their employment Conclusion: the governor’s veto power remains as the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program for recently hired public school teachers. So, legislature can improve the package of the workers. This also means they can chose not to improve the package. Now, governor's veto is the only obstacle to pension enhancement -> there are no other obstacles -> legislature is no more an obstacle -> legislature has already passed or supports the pension enhancement. This is what is given by option C. Hope this helps

Let me know if further clarity is needed. Attend the event this weekend to learn how to improve by up to 70 points in 25 days. https://e-gmat.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Click2register.png Thanks, Chiranjeev

sher676 · Answer

I think it is C.

If Governor is the only individual to veto the program, we can asume the state wants it improved.

vanilla · Answer

I think it should be C.
The paragraph states that the governor's veto power remains as the ONLY possible obstacle, hence it assumes that the legislature supports the new pension program.
I think it's not D because the statement says that the governor's veto power remains as the only POSSIBLE obstacle. It doesn't assume that the governor probably will.

What's the OA please?

rkassal · Answer

I would go with C. "Possible obstacle" is the key phrase here. The author is not implying that the program will be vetoed. All he is saying is that the program "could" be vetoed by the governor. He is assuming that everything else is in favor of the program. That legislature is in favor of the program. If this were not the case then, the author would not say "ONLY possible obstacle".

seekmba · Answer

it is C

state prohibits the law-makers from reducing the benefit package.
state allows improvment of benefit package.
governer's veto power (prohibiting power) is the only obtsacle to new pension enhancement program (governer is the only one prohibiting the new pension enhancement program)...which means Legislature is supporting the new pension enhancement program (option C).

E is irrelevant.

The State Constitution bans the legislature from reducing the benefit package of the state and local workers during their employment, but it does allow improvement of the package. Thus, the governor’s veto power remains as the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program for recently hired public school teachers.

The author of the argument is assuming which of the following?

The author of the argument is assuming which of the following?

(A) The governor wants to reduce the benefit of the package
(B) The new pension program is not part of the benefit package
(C) The legislature supports the new pension program
(D) The governor will probably veto the new pension program
(E) The State Constitution permits the governor to reduce the benefit package of employees during their employment

krypt · Answer

My answer is C.

The way I got there was using one of my lessons learned from: kaplan-cr-pension-program-34270.html#p235493.

Lesson 1: An extreme conclusion requires an extreme premise or assumption. For example, if the conclusion claims something to be the best, then all others must be inferior.

The conclusion is stating the veto power is the ONLY way the program can be rejected. Therefore, the appropriate assumption is that ALL OTHER ways to reject the program are not applicable.

Looks like the OA is C: kaplan-cr-pension-program-34270.html#p235493

PrashantPonde · Answer

Answer (C) is the correct choice. Legislature support means it is not the obstacle for the pension program. That leaves governor as probable obstacle for the pension program.

SVaidyaraman · Answer

When an assumption is needed there is something that doesn't logically follow from the argument. But to make the argument valid something has to be considered true or in other words we make an assumption

The clue to answering this question is in the words "remains as the only possible obstacle". It is something that doesn't follow from the argument but it has to be consistent with the argument. So you include the assumption which in this case is given by choice C. Only when the author assumes that the legislature supports the program can he say that the only possible obstacle to the program is the governor's veto power.

Triforce · Answer

(A) The governor wants to reduce the benefit of the package 
 Wrong  Out of scope since we talk about an improvement of the benefits.
 (B) The new pension program is not part of the benefit package 
 Wrong  The author assumes that the package is part of the benefit package. Otherwise the first sentence would make no sense.
 (C) The legislature supports the new pension program 
 Correct  If the legislature would not support the programm it would the other obstacle besides the possible veto of the governor. The latter would thus not be the ONLY obstacle.
 (D) The governor will probably veto the new pension program 
 Wrong  There has to be the possibility that the govenor vetos the upgrade. "Possible" inferes a liklehood which is irellevant. Further there could be other obstacles, like the rest of the legislature.
 (E) The State Constitution permits the governor to reduce the benefit package of employees during their employment 
 Wrong  Out of scope since we are talking about an enhancement and not an reduction of benefits.

swanidhi · Answer

I couldn't get the right answer in the first time. But after knowing that OA is C, it makes sense.

As per the argument,the SC bans L from 'reducing' some benefits package. But improvements (or enhancements) are allowed.
We have 2 powerful bodies in the argument.
1. Legislature
2. Governed
Since, argument mentions that Governor is the only bad guy, implies Legislature favors the 'improvement' or enhancement. This piece was however not stated and must be the assumption.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you answer choice C!

+Kudos, if this helped!!

deepak268 · Answer

Ans is c. If legislature is not supporting , then governor is not the only one obstacle.

AryamaDuttaSaikia · Answer

"C" says the legislature supports the new pension program which leaves us with only one option that the Governor's veto power is the only obstacle.If we negate this that the legislature does not support then the negated answer choice goes against the conclusion.In "B" even if its not part of the benefit package still the governor's veto power can be an obstacle.Moreover "b" is not a necessary assumption.

tanishajain800 · Answer

(C)  The legislature supports the new pension program 
The governor's veto is the ONLY obstacle as per the argument, so legislature obviously supports it.

deepthit · Answer

I go with C

Conclusion is only governor can stop the pension plan.
Only c states why governor has to stop it .. Since the legislation is planing to implement, governor's veto power is needed to stop that plan.

Bunuel · Answer

____________________________
The OA is C.

arya251294 · Answer

Can't option B be right? What if the pension program is part of the benefit package. And we know that legislature can very well do the improvements to the package. As part of improvement, can't the legislature introduce a new pensions scheme for recently hired public school teachers?

Experts please help.
 Bunuel 
 GMATNinja 
 VeritasKarishma

GMATVirtuoso · Answer

You're the only one with accurate reasoning.
"Enhancement" is the key word.

Posted from my mobile device

Vatsal7794 · Answer

Can anyone please explain me why option E is wrong?

Posted from my mobile device

Neurogenesis · Answer

Premises: The State Constitution bans the legislature from reducing the benefit package of the state and local workers during their employment, but it does allow improvement of the package.
 
 Conclusion: (introduced by the keyword “thus) Thus, the governor’s veto power remains as the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program for recently hired public school teachers. 
 
  The author of the argument is assuming which of the following?

There is a leap in the argument=> Is it a foregone conclusion that the legislature supports such program? 
 
 We are looking for the hidden premise which enables us to infer the conclusion.

(A) The governor wants to reduce the benefit of the package 
 The governor has the power (veto) to hinder the implementation of the pension enhancement program. Nothing shows that he wants to reduce the benefit of the package, he can block the enhancement. His veto is a “possible” obstacle. OUT
 
 (B) The new pension program is not part of the benefit package 
 The constitution allows the legislature to improve the benefit package. Thus, the veto power remains as the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program. The argument connects “benefit package” to “pension program”. Pension program is part of the benefit package. OUT
 
 (C) The legislature supports the new pension program 
 This is the hidden premise in the argument. The constitution allows the legislature to improve the benefit package; and from there, the prompt mentions that the veto power remains the only possible obstacle to the new pension enhancement program. This suggests that the program has been supported by the legislature. CORRECT
 
 (D) The governor will probably veto the new pension program 
 Again nothing is implied as to the probability of the governor to veto the program. His veto remains as the only “possible” obstacle. It is possible that he will veto, but no likelihood of such scenario occurring is specified. OUT
 
 (E) The State Constitution permits the governor to reduce the benefit package of employees during their employment 
 This is misleading. Note that the governor has the power to veto a legislature enhancing the benefit package. He can thus prevent improvement. Can he reduce the benefit package? No. The governor merely has a veto power. A legislation foreseeing a reduction of the benefit package would be illegal (anti-constitutional). OUT

I hope it helps

The State Constitution bans the legislature from reducing the benefit

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The State Constitution bans the legislature from reducing the benefit

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards