Question

Urban rail systems have been proposed to alleviate traffic congestion, but results in many cities have been cited as evidence that this approach to traffic management is ineffective. For example, a U.S. city that opened three urban rail branches experienced a net decline of 3,100 urban rail commuters during a period when employment increased by 96,000. Officials who favor urban rail systems as a solution to traffic congestion have attempted to counter this argument by noting that commuting trips in that city represent just 20 percent of urban travel.
The response of the officials to the claim that urban rail systems are ineffective is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it
A) presents no evidence to show that the statistics are incorrect
B) relies solely on general data about U.S. cities rather than data about the city in question
C) fails to consider that commuting trips may cause significantly more than 20 percent of the traffic congestion
D) fails to show that the decline in the number of urban rail commuters in one U.S. city is typical of U.S. cities generally
E) provides no statistics on the use of urban rail systems by passengers other than commuters

Answer 1

Answer:

C) fails to consider that commuting trips may cause significantly more than 20 percent of the traffic congestion

Step-by-step explanation:

The correct option is - C) fails to consider that commuting trips may cause significantly more than 20 percent of the traffic congestion

Reason -

Option A is incorrect because the statistics can not be incorrect.

Option B is incorrect because they are not talking about the city.

Option C is correct because Urban rail reduces congestion.

Option D is incorrect because the opposers cited the example of one city and the supporters are presenting evidence in the case of that city itself.

Option E is incorrect because they are providing an explanation for why the commuters data given by opposers is not relevant. The opposers talked about commuters.