扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2012-CR-29
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 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?
Health costs associated with smoking cause health insurance premiums to rise for everyone and so affect nonsmokers.
In rural areas of the state, there are relatively few retail establishments and government offices that are open to the public.
The state law would supersede the local antismoking ordinances, which contain stronger bans than the state law does.
There is considerable sentiment among voters in most areas of the state for restriction of smoking.
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.
摘自 CD 游园惊梦似归客 于 2016-10-21
[A]保险涨价，影响非烟民：这一点和人们“认为”的效果、新政“实际”的结果，都没有什么关系。
[B][新政]在偏远地区的影响有限：这一点仅和实施新政的“实际”结果有关，但“人们希望extend的原有政策，本身对偏远地区的影响大小” 却无从得知，也就无法证明在“对偏远地区的影响”这一层面上，“实际”的结果和人们“认为”的效果之间是否存在差异，从而也无法判断这个petition是否midleading。
[C][新政]会替代[力度更强的原有政策]：这一点提到了“实际”的结果以及“认为”的效果之间的关系，即：1.新政和原有政策的规定强度不一样；2.新政将废除原有政策。从这两点出发，我们可以得知，新政“实际”的结果和人们“认为”的效果完全contrast——因为如果新政和原有政策之间的管制强度一致，那就算废除了原有政策，至少还算某种意义上的extend；但实际情况是新政本身就弱于原有政策，新政还进一步废除了原有政策，导致人们认为的extend变成了abolish & shrink。所以人们认为的新政效果，和新政实际的结
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论