Columnist: Some people argue that the government should not take over failing private-sector banks because the government does not know how to manage financial institutions.
Statements
Some say, .
Pivot (however) Were they to take over a failing bank, the government wouldn't be managing day-to-day operations, just selecting people to be the bank's new senior management.
Analogy We're cool with politicians selecting people to manage the military, even though most politicians don't know who to manage the military, and that's at least as big a responsibility.
Evaluate
The question stem indicates that we're doing some sort of "soft" Must Be False thing. Some answer will go against what we read; the paragraph will give us reason to reject that answer.
On Must Be False, the correct answer usually goes against a conditional idea or goes against some inference we can derive by combining ideas.
There isn't any conditional logic in this paragraph, but there is a Pivot word (however) creating tension. Usually, when there's a pivot word, the inference we can derive comes from reconciling what comes after the pivot with what came before.
Here, before the pivot, we had people saying the government shouldn't take over failing banks. After the pivot. we get the author seemingly saying,
Goal
Look for anything that seems to actively go against what the paragraph was saying, possibly something like the original position that the author is rejecting.