The Passage - Key Facts:Fact 1: These laws can help reduce repeat offenders
Fact 2: Less populated states have a HIGHER proportion of repeat offenders
Fact 3: Therefore, laws would be MORE EFFECTIVE in less populated states
Why? Higher proportion = more room for improvement = bigger impactFact 4: States that have these laws = ALL less populated than Lino
The Logical Chain:Less populated states → Higher proportion → More room for improvement → Laws MORE effective
States with laws → Less populated than Lino → Laws more effective THERE than in Lino
Flip it: Laws would be LESS effective in Lino
Simple Example:Imagine a diet pill works better when you're more overweight.
State A (small):
40% overweight → pill very effective Lino (large):
15% overweight → pill less effective
The pill still HELPS Lino. It just helps State A MORE.
E says exactly this: Laws would "do less" in Lino than in states that already have them. ✓
Why B is Wrong:B says lack of information is
"the most important factor"
| Passage Says | B Claims |
|---|
| Laws "can help" | Most important factor |
Classic degree shift. "Can help" = one useful tool among many. "Most important" = the primary cause.
Maybe poverty, addiction, or unemployment matter more. We simply don't know what's MOST important.
Why C and D are Wrong:Both compare
NUMBERS of repeat offenders.
Passage only discusses
proportions and
effectiveness - not actual counts.
Without knowing total parolees in each state, we can't compare raw numbers.
Vibhatu
Bunuel please provide the official solution.
also why not B?