6. ress 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% of the projects cancelled were in such districts. But all of the cancelled 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 cancelled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future. D. (Omitted) E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessment of government projects.
If B is not true, then most of the projects deemed wasteful are in the President party's district, then the fact that 90% of cancelled projects are in opposite party's district could not be the gound for sound unbiased motivation.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2004-10-12 08:20:00
ress 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% of the projects cancelled were in such districts. But all of the cancelled 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. 
楼主