[求助]GWD17-9

jason00

Q9:

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?

1. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties。 无关


2. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.取非，被废的项目都在中统的辖区里，增强秘书长的推论，拿自己开刀 ， 不搞报复


3. 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.无关


4. 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. 取非，总统地区废的项目比其他党地区废的项目更贵，那就有可能其他党的便宜项目被废，总统可能 就在打击报复了，削弱了秘书长的推论了


5. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.

      取非，反对党认为无党派的报告公正的话，那就增强秘书长的推理

greenbow43

支持E

这题到底有没有定论阿

julywulotus

一点意见：

90% project的取消在对手的选区，而一份无党派人士报告说，那些将被取消的project经过评估确实都是浪费的。所以得出结论认为这次的决定和党派斗争无关。

其实这里有一个flaw,就是无党派人士的评估报告只针对已经被president party提出来要cancel的那些project.

所以还是觉得E的可能性大一些。如果评估报告被反对党用作反击依据的话，可以削弱原文结论。

starssailor

本来我选E,后来再一细看，发现E恰恰说反了，如果去掉NOT,大概就对了吧。

A明显无关

不明白为什么B对

nijiz

upupup

fairy533

今天想了一下,真的是B..

这些被认为浪费的项目大部分是在P控制的地区内。--》P应该取消自己的项目多一些,但是P取消的项目中90%是在反对党的地区的，就是政治上的报复。

nothingwrong

这题应该选B，核心词是wasteful. B说那些被证明浪费的地不都在政府的地盘内=〉opposite party 里面也有很多的wasteful。政府取消了修路从而也benefit了opposite party, 所以得出结论这不是报复。

cammln

终于想通了！

反对党认为：总统在报复，因为90%被取消的项目是反对党地区的项目。

Secretary反驳该观点：

根据（1）被取消的项目是根据无党派人士做的报告进行的。（即报告是公正的）

（2）该报告认为浪费的项目主要不是总统政党控制的区域。（即大部分被取消的项目在反对党地区是因为报告的结论而不是因为总统的主观意见）