believerinthy
It's listed under parallelism but the explaination from community deals it with Idioms.
Requesting some expert insight.
Hello,
believerinthy. The question hinges upon an understanding of both idiomatic usage and parallelism. The first major split is between
coverage of and
coverage for, and in the context of the sentence,
coverage for is idiomatically correct: a bill promises coverage
for somebody or a group, not
of somebody or a group. Right away, you can whittle the answer pool down to (C) and (D). Both of these answer choices use
and in a way that does not join two independent clauses, so we are looking for parallel entities,
X and Y, to create a logical bridge in explaining who will be covered under the bill. The first group is
the uninsured; after
and, we are looking for the second group. Choice (C) gives us
those with pre-existing medical conditions, or, in other words, a second group of people. Meanwhile, choice (D) gives us nothing more than the conditions themselves, creating a non-sensical comparison and rupturing the parallelism of
X and Y. We can safely eliminate (D).
I hope that helps address your concerns. Good luck with your studies.
- Andrew