Critical Reasoning

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!

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.

The answer IMO is C,
but I have see this question somewhere else and the OA was E

weird Q will go wid C.

IMO - C

IMO E.

I dont see C as misleading...

OA given is E

B is out and out of scope.

Please verify the OA and post the source of the question

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

Can anyone check the OA?
I saw it as C, not E

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.