Representative : " Our prison system have been criticized for having

Question

Representative: "Our prison system have been criticized for having what some say are inadequate facilities. While its true that there are some improvements to be made, Critics should consider that improving the prisons has been one of the state's primary concern in the past years. In fact over the last few years we have spent more money on this project than on any other"

Which of the following, if true, would seriously undermine the reasoning in representative's argument?

Which of the following, if true, would seriously undermine the reasoning in representative's argument?

A. Prison systems in neighboring states have also been criticized for having inadequate facilities.
B. In the past few years, there has been a sharp increase in the number of felony convictions in this state.
C. Only states with presently inadequate facilities would need to allocate large amounts of money to the prison system.
D. In general, prison systems require more money to maintain than other institutions of a comparable size.
E. State funds should go toward improving the economy and eradicating homelessness, not improving the prisons.

Carcass · Answer

First of all, please, follow the forum rules for posting in verbal section.

The title of the post must be the first sentence of the questeion and OA is mandatory.

Back to the question

A. Prison systems in neighboring states have also been criticized for having inadequate facilities.

what happens in other states in not our concern

B. In the past few years, there has been a sharp increase in the number of felony convictions in this state.

the number of felony convictions is not relevant

C. Only states with presently inadequate facilities would need to allocate large amounts of money to the prison system.

this is our answer: if we shows that the spending of large amount of money is because the state have a prison system completely inadeguate. Therefore, we weaken the argument saying that there is not improvement after all.

D. In general, prison systems require more money to maintain than other institutions of a comparable size.

this comparison is irrelevant

E. State funds should go toward improving the economy and eradicating homelessness, not improving the prisons.

this is a simple opinion

Hope is clear

aragonn · Answer

This question asks you to find the statement that most seriously undermines the reasoning in the argument. The argument consists of a state representative's response to criticism regarding the adequacy of their prison facilities. The attempts to counter this charge by changing the subject and saying that the state plans to allocate a lot of funds to the prison system in the next year. A statement that undermines this reasoning will suggest a way in which increased spending may not lead to adequate facilities.

Choice (A)  presents unrelated information; we are concerned with the prison system in this state, not those in neighboring states. 
 Choice (B)  suggests a reason why the prison facilities may be inadequate: if there has been a recent increase in felony convictions, then there may be more inmates than the system can handle. This appears to undermine the representative's argument insofar it shows that the critics were likely justified in calling the facilities inadequate. However, we don't know how the increase in felony convictions actually affected the total number of inmates in the system; without this additional information, the statement in choice (B) can have no effect on the argument. 
 Choice (C)  shows a way in which increased spending may not lead to adequate facilities. If the state allocated large amounts of money to the system in the last few years, then it must be true that the state's prison facilities were inadequate. The discussion of funding should set alarm bells off because good funding does not equate with good results. In fact, this question raises the paradox that high funding might actually mean that the prisons are in dire shape and desperately need the money. 
 Choice (D)  is irrelevant; the cost of maintaining other institutions is not in question. 
 Choice (E)  has no effect on the argument; even if we agree that the state should not use their money in this way, a statement of opinion can have no bearing on an argument's logical structure. 
 Choice (C) most seriously undermines the representative's argument, and is the best choice.

thefibonacci · Answer

i know the OA is C. but can someone give a good reasoning against D. the stem states   we have spent more money on this project than on any other  
doesn't this concur with D that the money which is pumped is just for maintaining and not uplifting the facilities?

aragonn · Answer

As i mentioned in earlier post that the cost of maintaining other institutions is not in question. Do have any specific concern or angle on this choice ?

abhishekdadarwal2009 · Answer

Representative : " Our prison system have been criticized for having what some say are inadequate facilities. While its true that there are some improvements to be made, Critics should consider that improving the prisons has been one of the state's primary concern in the past years. In fact over the last few years we have spent more money on this project than on any other"

Which of the following , if true , would seriously undermine the reasoning in represenative's arguement?
 
A. Prison systems in neighboring states have also been criticized for having inadequate facilities. neighboring states are not compared
 B. In the past few years, there has been a sharp increase in the number of felony convictions in this state. number of felonies do not impact the state of prison directly.
 C. Only states with presently inadequate facilities would need to allocate large amounts of money to the prison system  correct weakner.
 D. In general, prison systems require more money to maintain than other institutions of a comparable size. this comparison is out of scope
 E. State funds should go toward improving the economy and eradicating homelessness, not improving the prisons. no such recommendation required.

Ghostrider3147 · Answer

Can anyone explain in layman language why c weakens the argument???

Thanks in advance.

Posted from my mobile device

c3tangerines · Answer

The representative is arguing that the prison system isn't inadequate because the state spends a lot of money on it. C weakens the argument if true because it's just saying that spending a lot of money on it actually means it is inadequate. The opposite of what the rep is trying to argue.

Mavisdu1017 · Answer

Hello expert,
I was torn by C and D, and I think both the two can weaken. Need your ideas and thanks in advance.

MartyTargetTestPrep · Answer

The representative is arguing against the following idea.

Our prison system have been criticized for having what some say are inadequate facilities.

The premise used in arguing against that idea is the following.

In fact over the last few years we have spent more money on this project than on any other.

Here's (D).

In general, prison systems require more money to maintain than other institutions of a comparable size.

I agree that (D) weakens the case somewhat since it undermines the support provided by the premise by reducing the significance of the fact that more money has been spent on improving the prison facilities than on any other project.

c3tangerines · Answer

I think the easiest way to tell is that D says “In general”. Stating something “in general” will almost never “seriously undermine” an argument especially for a specific case, whereas C is stating an absolute using the word “only”.

Posted from my mobile device

kartickdey · Answer

in option C it has been stated that Only states with presently inadequate facilities would need to allocate large amounts of money to the prison system but in the stimulus nowhere it is mentioned that the there is a need to allocate large amounts of money to the prison system. So how we can conclude that presently the facility is inadequate. Please clarify.

guddo · Answer

Representative: "Our prison system have been criticized for having what some say are inadequate facilities. While its true that there are some improvements to be made, Critics should consider that improving the prisons has been one of the state's primary concern in the past years. In fact over the last few years we have spent more money on this project than on any other"

Which of the following, if true, would seriously undermine the reasoning in representative's argument?

Which of the following, if true, would seriously undermine the reasoning in representative's argument?

The representative argues that because the state has spent more money on prisons than any other project in recent years, it shows the state has made prison improvement a primary concern, implying critics should acknowledge this effort. The reasoning assumes that high spending reflects serious commitment and progress, not that the prisons were so inadequate they required huge spending just to catch up.

A. Prison systems in neighboring states have also been criticized for having inadequate facilities.

Irrelevant. What neighboring states do doesn’t affect whether this state’s spending shows genuine concern or adequacy.

B. In the past few years, there has been a sharp increase in the number of felony convictions in this state.

This might explain  why  more money was spent (more prisoners), but it doesn’t undermine the claim that spending reflects prioritization. If anything, it could support the need for spending.

C. Only states with presently inadequate facilities would need to allocate large amounts of money to the prison system.

Correct.  If it’s true that only states with  presently inadequate  facilities need to allocate large sums, then the high spending actually confirms the critics’ point—the prisons were so inadequate they required disproportionate funding. This turns the representative’s evidence against them.

D. In general, prison systems require more money to maintain than other institutions of a comparable size.

This could justify why prisons cost more, but it doesn’t challenge the idea that high spending shows prioritization.

E. State funds should go toward improving the economy and eradicating homelessness, not improving the prisons.

This is a value judgment about where funds  should  go, not a factual rebuttal to the representative’s argument about where funds  have  gone.

Answer: C

guddo · Answer

You’re right the stimulus doesn’t say there’s a “need”, it just says they  have  spent more money. But the representative uses that spending as evidence of their concern and effort.

Option C works by flipping the meaning of that spending. If C is true, then large spending doesn’t show strong commitment, it shows the facilities were  so inadequate  that huge money was  required  just to try to catch up. So the very fact the representative cites (high spending) actually confirms the critics’ point (inadequate facilities), instead of refuting it. It undermines the reasoning by breaking the link between spending and genuine prioritization.

kartickdey · Answer

there is difference between something has already happened and something is going to happen.

guddo · Answer

You’re right, past spending doesn’t prove future adequacy. That’s why option C works: it links high spending directly to current inadequacy, turning the rep’s evidence against them.

Representative : " Our prison system have been criticized for having

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

Representative : " Our prison system have been criticized for having

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