Wrong trigger. We don’t know that the bill “would benefit most people.” We know that most people favor the bill, but that doesn’t suggest most people would benefit from it.

Wrong trigger. Although we know that the bill won’t be passed for “many years,” it’s still possible that the bill will pass EVENTUALLY. So we don’t have enough to say that the bill will not eventually pass into law.

(C) establishes that if the people who oppose a law ARE very influential, then a bill that’s favored by most people will not necessary become law in a few years in a well-functioning democracy. This allows the country to be a well-functioning democracy, even if the bill won’t become law in a few years.

(D) establishes that in a well-functioning democracy, any bill passed into law will be favored by most people and be consistent with basic human rights. This could allow us to prove that a country isn’t a well-functioning democracy, if we knew there was a bill that was passed into law that wasn’t favored by most people or wasn’t consistent with basic human rights. But we don’t have any premises describing a bill that was passed into law.

(E), restated, asserts that in a well-functioning democracy, if a bill is favored by most people and does not violate anyone’s basic human rights, then it will pass quickly into law. The premises establish that even though the bill is favored by most people and does not violate anyone’s basic human rights, it WON’T pass quickly into law. Through the contrapositive of (E), then, we can conclude that the country is not a well-functioning democracy.