Critical Reasoning

The United States government generally tries to protect valuable natural resources but one resource has been ignored for too long. In the United States, each bushel of corn produced might result in the loss of as much as two bushels of topsoil. Moreover, in the last 100 years, the topsoil in many states, which once was about fourteen inches thick, has been eroded to only six or eight inches. Nonetheless, federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have remained at ridiculously low levels. Total federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have been less than the allocations of some individual states.

Which one of the following best expresses the main point of the argument?

(A) Corn is not a cost-effective product and substitutes should be found where possible.

(B) A layer of topsoil only six to eight inches thick cannot support the continued cultivation of corn.

(C) Soil conservation is a responsibility of the federal government, not the states.

(D) The federal government's expenditures for soil conservation in the various states have been inequitable.

(E) The federal government should spend much more on soil conservation than it has been spending.

OA is E
What is the best way to determine is option E is sufficient? I need an Expert reply please.

Option A- INCORRECT.
Substituting corn for some other product will be hard to decide, because, the immerse use of corn in producing food products for human consumption is not quantifiable. Therefore, alternative on how to increase it should be looked into rather than decreasing the production of corn or substituting it.

Option B - INCORRECT.
This statement of fact in this option '' A layer of topsoil only six to eight inches thick cannot support the continued cultivation of corn'' has not be proven in the argument, therefore it stand to weaken the argument.

Option C - INCORRECT.
Soil conservation is not just the responsibility of the federal government alone, nevertheless, more of financial support is needed from the federal government to support the state allocation on soil conservation.

Option D - INCORRECT.Federal Government expenditure on soil conservation has been inequitable that is why, most states under the united state Government have been unable to meet up with increase in soil conservation and the production of corn to serve his citizens.

Option E - CORRECT.
The statement in this option best explain the clamor of most states under the United state Government on their request for increment in the allocation of expenditures of nation wide soil conservation programs. This request is due to the result of loss in the topsoil consumed during the cultivation of corn which has lead to a ridiculous decrease in the production of corn in most states.