Just countered this question from MCAT. To me, this is a tough CR question.
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:
(1) Identify the Question TypeThe language "calls into question" and "if true" indicates that this is a Weaken the Conclusion question. The "EXCEPT" variation indicates that we need to find and eliminate 4 "weaken" answers. The "odd one out" answer, an answer that does not weaken, will be the correct answer.
(2) Deconstruct the ArgumentIn order to avert a budget crisis, New City's transit authority must increase subway revenues by 50 percent. The chair of the transit authority has devised a plan to increase subway fares by exactly this percentage and believes that this will avert any crisis. In other words, the chair is assuming that a 50 percent fare increase will lead directly to a 50 percent increase in actual revenues and that this increase will occur as soon as the plan is implemented.
(3) State the GoalWe're asked to find something that does not weaken the argument. The four (incorrect) answers, which will weaken the argument, must each make the conclusion at least somewhat less likely to be true or valid. The correct answer will either strengthen the conclusion or be irrelevant to the conclusion.
Implicit in the stated plan is the assumption that nothing will offset the fare increase or delay an immediate increase in revenues. The chairperson assumes that ridership levels will not drop and that there won't be any other reasons why the 50% fare increase might not result in an immediate revenue increase of 50%.
(4) Work From Wrong To Right(A) If prepaid tokens will remain valid, current subway riders who purchase a large number of tokens at current prices will be able to avoid paying the increased fare for some time – thus delaying the projected increase in revenue. The chairperson assumes that the fare increase will produce the desired result more or less immediately, an assumption that is undermined by this choice.
(B) If this statement is true, then the proposed subway fare increase will raise subway fares to a level higher than the corresponding express bus fares. In that case, many current subway riders will have an incentive to switch from the subway to the express buses. If some do switch, revenues are likely to decrease.
(C) The proposed subway fare increase is far greater than 25 percent, so, if this statement is true, the increase will trigger a reduction in the tax revenue given to the subway system. That tax reduction will offset the revenue increase from the greater fare, thus undermining the chairperson's plan.
(D) CORRECT. The greater rate of job growth in areas outside the reach of the subway does not, by itself, contain or imply any basis for a negative effect on subway revenues. In particular, there is no reason to assume that the number of workers who ride the subway will decrease. In fact, the wording of this choice suggests that New City is actually adding jobs in areas served by the subway, albeit more slowly than in the suburbs; thus, if anything, the subway's ridership is more likely to increase (however slowly) than to decrease. The chairperson's argument requires only that the ridership not decrease, so this choice does not weaken that argument.
(E) This choice states that "a significant percentage" of New City's professionals have come to view mobile phones as essential, specifically during commute times. If phones are banned, many current subway riders will have an incentive to switch from the subway to another mode of transportation; if so, revenues are likely to decrease.