The Canadian Auto Workers' (CAW) Legal Services Plan, designed to give active and retired autoworkers and their families access to totally prepaid or partially reimbursed legal services, has been in operation since late 1985. ████ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ██████ ███ ██████ █████ ████████ █████ ████████ ███ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ██ ███████ ███████ ███████ ████████ ██ █████ ███ ██████ ████ ██ ████ ███ ████ ██ █ ████████████ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ███ ██████ █ ██████ ███ ███ ███████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ███████ ███
█████ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ██ ██ █████ ██ ███ ████████████ █████ █████ ████ ███████ ███ █████████ █████ ███ ██████ ██████ ██ █████ ███████████ ██████████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ███ █████ █████████ ████ █████ ███ ████ ████ ██████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ ███ ████ ██ ███████████ ████████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ████ ████████ ████ ████ ██████████ ██ ████ █████ ██ ██ ████████████ ██████ ███
███ ██ ██ ████████ ████ █████████ ███ ██ ████ █████ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ██████ ████████████ ██ ██ █ ███████████ ████████ ██ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ███
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ████████ ██ ███ ████████ ███████ ██
It points to ██ ██████ ██ █████ █████ ████ ███ ██████ ████████ ████ ██ ███████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ █████ █████████
According to the author’s criticism in P3, the plans “
It is identified ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ██████████████ ███████ ██████████ ██ ██ ████████████ ██████████ ██ ███ █████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███ ████████ ██████████████
P3 describes the author’s criticism of prepaid legal plans, not the plan administrators’ opinion. We have no idea what administrators think of the plans being “marketing devices” for unestablished lawyers, since administrators aren’t mentioned in P3. We just know that the author thinks that unestablished lawyers will bring lower quality services and less client satisfaction.
It identifies what ███ ██████ █████████ ██ ██ ███ ██ ███ ███ ███████████ ████████ ████ █████ █████ ███ ████████
The author thinks that the plans functioning as “marketing devices” for unestablished lawyers is a cost, not a benefit. He believes that unestablished lawyers will bring lower quality services and less client satisfaction.
It is reported ██ ████ ██ ███████ █████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██████████ ██ ███████████ ███████ ███ ██████ ████ ██████████████
The claim that the plans function as marketing devices for unestablished lawyers is part of the author’s own argument against the plans; he doesn’t attribute this argument to lawyers. Also, he says that established lawyers won’t participate in the plan because
It describes one ██ ███ █████ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ███ ██ █████████ ██████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████████ ██ █████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████
We don’t anything about the burdens of unestablished lawyers or whether unestablished lawyers advocate for legal plans at all. Instead of (E), the author uses the referenced text to argue that the plans will bring lower quality legal services and less client satisfaction, since established lawyers probably won’t participate.