This question asks us to cast doubt on the proposed solution. What is that solution? It is: To reserve more of the exit and merging lanes on the most crowded highways for corporate trucks. Why? Because accidents have risen by almost a third.

This argument makes the assumption that merging corporate trucks are one preventable cause of the accidents and that reserving lanes will eliminate at least some of these accidents.

Answer choice (A). This is a really weak answer choice. It says that the "most common" source of accidents are construction roadblocks and dangerous conditions. Yet does this indicate that the proposed solution will fail? Not really. Construction roadblocks might be 75 percent of accidents and the lack of merging lanes might be 25 percent, yet by eliminating problems with merging the entire 30 percent increase in accidents could be wiped out.

Answer choice (B) surely should read: Since traffic laws were relaxed, the number of cars on the road at any given time has risen by almost half. And no, that's not the answer.

Answer choice (C) talks about the percentage of merging and exit lanes, but does not suggest that additional merging lanes would or would not help.

Answer choice (D), if anything, suggests that the plan might well work. It does not weaken the plan.

Answer choice (E) talks about the damage caused by the accidents not the accidents themselves. Nor does it say anything about whether merging lanes would be helpful.

So what's the answer? I suppose the question writer wanted (A) to be the answer.