Prep2012-Pack1-CR-029 VCR000806 Medium
Reasoning
What could make the petition misleading to voters who assumed its purpose was to extend local antismoking ordinances statewide? The petition would mislead such voters if it were not intended to help extend local antismoking ordinances statewide as the voters assumed. The information provided suggests that the petition does genuinely support statewide smoking restriction and that the campaign workers are describing it accurately. But the petition could still mislead the voters if the proposed statewide smoking restriction would actually weaken local smoking ordinances.
A. This is a reason to support a smoking ban, not a reason why a petition to implement such a ban would be misleading.
B. Voters who assume that the ban would extend local ordinances might not assume that the ban would have a huge impact in rural areas.
C. Correct. If the proposed law would supersede and weaken local ordinances, then it would not extend them statewide as the voters assume. Therefore, the petition would be misleading.
D. This suggests that most voters would support a statewide smoking ban, not that a petition to implement such a ban would be misleading.
E. E This suggests that the state law would be compatible with local ordinances, just as voters who think that the law would extend those ordinances would assume.
The correct answer is C.
Prep2012-Pack1-CR-030 VCR000834 Medium
Reasoning
What evidence suggests that trees might not be abundant in 20 years if the plan is implemented? The reasoning behind the plan is that if data show which tree species has the best survival record, and if many trees of that species are then planted, then the overall tree population will survive better than it would otherwise. This reasoning assumes that at least one tree species with a good survival record will be found and that abundantly planted trees of that species will survive at least as well over the next 20 years as local trees of the same species did during the past 20 years. Evidence casting doubt on either of these assumptions could suggest that the plan will not ensure an abundant tree population.
A. If environmental conditions for trees don't become harsher, then abundant trees are more likely to survive.
B. Although trees that were cut down 20 years ago cannot contribute to the tree population 20 years from now, the plan calls for planting many new trees.
C. The plan calls for planting many trees from the species with the best survival rate over the past 20 years. Therefore, it does not matter if there is one species that had a poor survival rate.
D. The plan requires only that the tree census find at least one tree species with a reasonably high 20-year survival rate; it does not require that any species grows as well in urban conditions as in natural conditions.
E. Correct. The plan calls for planting many trees of a single species. Therefore, if a disease could then devastate the trees, the plan will not ensure an abundant tree population in 20 years.
The correct answer is E.
