Letter to the editor: The Planning

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope - Other Group1% picked this

   Departments other than the Planning Department have had much larger budget

   Departments other than the Planning Department are not relevant to the argument.

   1%
2. B

   Too Weak6% picked this

   Since 2001, the Planning Department has dramatically reduced its spending on

   Even though the Planning Department has reduced spending on overtime pay, the fact remains that the department’s budget is five times what it was in 2001.

   6%
3. C

   Too Weak3% picked this

   In some years between 2001 and this year, the Planning Department budget

   The budget may not have increase each year between 2001 and this year, but the fact remains that the department’s budget is five times what it was in 2001.

   3%
4. D

   Out of Scope14% picked this

   The budget figures used in the original editorial were adjusted

   The critique takes place in the same inflation adjusted dollars as the original editorial and so the spending has increased five times from the level in 2001. The issue with the argument isn’t increased spending but rather the duties of the department.

   14%
5. E

   Correct75% picked this

   A restructuring act, passed in 2003, broadened the duties of the

   Why this is right

   This shows that the department does not spend five times as much to perform the same duties. While it does spend five times as much, it performs more duties than it did before.

   Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   75%