analysis of argument structure

thephoenix wrote:Candidate for Mayor: My opponent argues that the best way to increase the city's tax revenues is to double the tax on rental cars so that non-residents provide the bulk of the additional income. This plan is unethical because it constitutes taxation without representation: we should not excessively tax those who cannot vote on the plan. Moreover, if car rental prices are too high in our city, people may simply rent cars in neighboring cities to avoid the tax surcharge.

The candidate responds to her opponent's plan by ______.

Introducing a moral quandary that cannot be resolved without additional data.
Incorrect : The candidate only says that the plan is unethical but additional to resolve it is not discussed.

Arguing for an alternate strategy by which to accomplish the declared objective.
Incorrect : Nowhere in the stimulus is an alternate strategy prescribed. Eliminated

Claiming that the opponent's proposal contains inaccurate data.
Incorrect : No such claim is made in the stimulus

Implying that the plan may result in the opposite of the intended effect.
Correct : If ppl started renting cars in neighbouring cities it would mean that car rentals in this city would decline,leading to drop in tax revenues.

Demonstrating that her opponent's plan would fail to achieve its goal.
Incorrect : Failure of the opponent's plan is not discussed.

l