The argument in the editorial concludes that it is an "outrage" that the city has selected a contractor where 60 percent of the technicians are "unqualified," based on the fact that only 40 percent are certified. For this argument to hold, the editorial is assuming that being
uncertified equates to being
unqualified. If uncertified technicians could still be qualified, then the claim that the city hired a contractor with 60 percent "unqualified" technicians would be invalid.
A) Certified technicians receive higher pay than uncertified technicians.This may be true, but the argument is not about pay, so it is irrelevant to the editorial's conclusion.
B) There are no contractors with fewer than 40 percent of their technicians certified.The editorial is criticizing the choice of the contractor, but this choice does not depend on whether other contractors have different percentages of certified technicians. This does not impact the reasoning of the argument.
C) Technicians who lack certification are not qualified technicians.This is the key assumption that matches our pre-thinking. The editorial assumes that certification is the only measure of qualification, so uncertified technicians are unqualified. Without this assumption, the argument falls apart.
D) Qualified technicians installed the heating systems to be upgraded.This is irrelevant to the current argument, which focuses on the qualifications of the technicians employed by the contractor for future upgrades, not on who installed the current systems.
E) The contractor hired by the city has personal ties to city officials.This introduces an idea of bias or corruption but is not necessary for the argument, which focuses on the qualification of the technicians, not on why the contractor was chosen.
C is the correct answer.