Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects. 作者: sunlight841206 时间: 2010-1-12 10:35
题目：1）highway project 被President cancel；2）有些人拿出证据“90 percent of the projects canceled 都是opposition parties控制的 ”，那么President这种行为是vindictive desire；3）respected nonpartisan auditors证明all of the canceled projects都是一种浪费，那么President这种行为是出于sound budgetary policy（Press Secretary的观点） D答案：“The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party ”比“the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties”花费少。这就相当于“少扣除President’s party的钱，多扣除opposition partie的钱”。 如果是这个答案，那不就是说明President真坏，多扣除对手的钱，少扣除自己人的钱，他这种行为是vindictive desire。 B答案：被视为浪费的highway projects都不在President’s party控制范围内。看看，President多清廉，从来不靠垃圾项目来要money.那么他此次的行为肯定是by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.作者: markfang56 时间: 2010-1-12 13:04
我认为楼上的解释有问题。应该理解是。 首先发言人的言论中是存在漏洞的。漏洞就是，如果同样的在总统的管辖区内所申报的项目也存在浪费情况的话，那么只否决在反对党州中的浪费项目这一举动就不能视做是纯粹从预算角度考虑，而不是报复行为。 因此，言论成立的条件是，正好大部分的浪费项目都在反对党的州中。因此总统所针对的是浪费项目，而不是党派。 b 正好所阐述的就是这个。 这题的所表达的内容和花钱的多少是无关的。就算花的多，但不一定代表浪费啊。造100公里花1000万，和造1000公里花1500万，怎么比较呢？？所以d没有意义。作者: 铁甲 时间: 2010-1-12 20:13
我也来说句。 做假设题的思路是，如果某个选项不成立，那么推出题干不成立，这个选项就正确。 对于b取否，假如被判定为浪费的公路项目大部分是在总统势力内，比如10个总统项目，1个反对派项目，都被认为浪费，而结果仅仅只有反对派的项目被否定掉了，那么就说明总统在公报私仇。因此选b 而对d取否，假如取消掉的总统的项目比反对派项目还要贵，也推不出总统公报私仇。不能选。