Help Please!!! Not understanding why answer choice A is correct. I thought the disagreement was over lowering of the blood alcohol levels for highway safety...

Gregory,

This one is actually really similar to the question about the two paleontologists. As was the case with that question, you've got to peel back a layer and figure out what underlying premises are informing each party's argument.

Steven says: Reducing the legal BAC limit will make roads safer BY discouraging social drinkers. This will "significantly" increase highway safety.

Miguel says: Reducing the legal BAC limit will NOT make highways safer, because the most important issue is heavy drinkers, and heavy drinkers will not be deterred by lower BAC limits.


So, it seems Steven thinks the problem is social drinkers, and Miguel thinks the issue is heavy drinkers.

But what do you do if you can't find an answer choice that matches this disagreement?
If that's the case, fall back on the process of elimination.

Let's go through each answer choice:
(A) Well, Steven definitely thinks this is true. But does Miguel really dispute it? Let's check out the other choices and come back to this one.

(B) Neither party disputes this. This is out.
(C) Neither party disputes this either--Miguel does not claim that this statement IS true, and Steven CERTAINLY doesn't agree with this. Strike this statement.
(D) Huh. Let's think about this one. Nobody makes the claim that NO drivers with a BAC below the legal limit pose a threat. And if nobody makes the claim that this is NOT true, there is no disagreement. Remember, we're looking for a statement that one party thinks is TRUE, and the other party thinks is FALSE.
(E) This is too strong. Steven thinks that the BAC limit should be halved. So he certainly seems to thinks that people who have a BAC above half the current limit can be dangerous. But what about Miguel? Does he say that a driver with a BAC "slightly above" half the legal limit NECESSARILY poses NO threat. No, he doesn't say that.

So now, back to choice (A):
Once we re-read this choice after looking at the other options, it looks even better.
Read it again:
"Social drinkers who drink an drive pose a substantial threat to the public."

We know Steven agrees with this statement.

And we know that Miguel DOES NOT believe it is true. He says that "lowering the current allowable blood alcohol level would have *little effect on highway safety*." And he makes this statement in response to Steven's claim that lowing the BAC limit would discourage social drinkers. So what he is saying is that fewer social drinkers would have "little effect on highway safety."

Choice (A) is our winner.