GWD17-Q9:

Press Secretary:  Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.  They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts.  But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors.  So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary’s argument depends?

1. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
2. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
3. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
4. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
5. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.

答案B，可是我认为是D，用TEST取非B没有削弱结论啊？

LZ选D完全可以理解，因为你肯定看到了最后一句话：a sound budgetary policy，因此和D中的expensive对应。

但这个理解不是文章的重点，文中小蜜的分析是：总统的决策没有偏见因为所否定的项目都是高度浪费的，尽管这些项目都是在野党的。很自然我们可以想到：执政党管辖范围内的项目是否浪费呢？如果总统的决策是无偏见的，那么应对待自己的项目和对待在野党的项目政策一样。

B说的就是这个意思，wasteful的项目并没有大多数被执政党控制，比如只有10%是执政党的，那么从所有的wasteful项目中否决一定的比例，被否决这部分项目中在野党的仍应占绝大多数（90%左右）

B取非也可以削弱：The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party计划中的项目被列为浪费的绝大多数是执政党的项目，那么这就说明总统其实是不公正的，因为自己党派的项目多数是浪费的，但却否定了很多opposite party的项目。因此其目的不是出于sound budget。