BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

in one state

Expert replies
by geet » Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:47 pm
In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.



Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?

A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.

B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.

C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.

D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.

E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.

OA l8r...do explain your logic!
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Re: in one state

by shilpi84 » Mon Jul 13, 2009 10:21 pm
geet wrote:In one state, all cities and most towns have antismoking ordinances. A petition entitled “Petition for Statewide Smoking Restriction” is being circulated to voters by campaign workers who ask only, “Do you want to sign a petition for statewide smoking restriction?” The petition advocates a state law banning smoking in most retail establishments and in government offices that are open to the public.



Which of the following circumstances would make the petition as circulated misleading to voters who understand the proposal as extending the local ordinances statewide?

A. Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.

B. In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.

C. The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.

D. There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.

E. The state law would not affect existing local ordinances banning smoking in places where the fire authorities have determined that smoking would constitute a fire hazard.

OA l8r...do explain your logic!
IMO C
The new state law would be less stringent compared to local antismoking ordinances.This is misleading for the voters who will sign the petition.
Join the discussion

by tohellandback » Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:45 am
The answer IMO is C,
but I have see this question somewhere else and the OA was E
The powers of two are bloody impolite!!
Join the discussion

by bignasty666 » Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:51 am
weird Q will go wid C.
Join the discussion

by mehravikas » Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:21 pm
IMO - C
Join the discussion

by ssmiles08 » Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:45 pm
IMO E.

I dont see C as misleading...
You got a dream... You gotta protect it. People can't do somethin' themselves, they wanna tell you you can't do it. If you want somethin', go get it. Period.
Join the discussion

by geet » Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:50 pm
OA given is E
Last edited by geet on Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion

by gmat740 » Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:10 pm
B is out and out of scope.

Please verify the OA and post the source of the question
Join the discussion

by geet » Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:00 pm
gmat740 wrote:B is out and out of scope.

Please verify the OA and post the source of the question
Hi gmat740

Sorry for the typo OA given is E but

My answer is "B" for the following reasons.
Situation: ask for voters for the petition of statewide smoking restriction, covering not only city but also rural areas.
Since petition now can't apply to rural areas as the answer B suggests, it will mislead those voters who are aware of the petition
Join the discussion

by netcaesar » Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:52 pm
Can anyone check the OA?
I saw it as C, not E
Join the discussion

by AnuragRatna » Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:06 pm
C. If local antismoking ordinances currently contains stronger bans than the state law does, signing for the petition will actually make the local banning smoking weaker, because local law is replaced by state law. Voters who sign for the petition will want to have stronger local banning smoking ordinances. So C, if exists, actually mislead the voters.
Miles to go before i sleep!!!
Join the discussion