GRE Prep Club Team Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2017
Posts: 2506
Given Kudos: 1053
GPA: 3.39
Re: In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances.
[#permalink]
24 Nov 2022, 09:57
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.
Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?
Question type- Find the Flaw in argument
Argument states that
# In a Particular State- all Cities+ most towns there is Anti smoking law.
# Petition circulated among voters- for statewide Smoking restriction
# This petition supports law to ban smoking at retail establishments + govt offices open to public
Goal - Is to identify circumstance/ thought which will mislead voters who are thinking this petition 's purpose is to extend local law statewide. What can lead to misunderstanding of this purpose of the petition.
(A) Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.
- Health cost is one of the negative effect of smoking. so probably there is anti smoking law to reduce health cost.. This does not present circumstances to mislead voters assumption that petition of statewide law was extension of local law. It just talks about effect of smoking .
So we eliminate A
(B) In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.
- Even though there are few retail establishments and govt offices open to public, how does that mislead the voters. Impact on rural area is not focus area anyways.so it is irrelevant.
(C) The state law would supersede the local anti smoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.
- If voters are lead to think that statewide law is not as strong as local law for antismoking. State law is comparatively weak and it will replace strong local law . This understanding will mislead Voters assumption that statewide law was extension to local law . Voters who sign for the petition will want to have stronger local ban.
This is the answer we were looking for.
CORRECT
(D) There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.
This simply states that voters are in favour of statewide law. Does not talk about misleading circumstances. So Eliminate D
(E) The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.
- This suggest state law will be compatible with local law. This is inline with what Voters have assumed about petition. So Eliminate
D
Answer: C