Also, "tends to diminish" means there has to be the possibility that gov by ref has enhanced at least once in the past given that gov by rep just does it better. Otherwise how would you even draw that comparison?

I think this is more whole to part flaw, where a kind of contemporary novel (psych, action, romance, etc.) sucks, and therefore concludes that ALL kinds of contemporary novels suck. A is saying since gov can't regulate employment or inflation (which are parts underneath their whole economy), then that guarantees that they will suck at improving the whole economy. I think C is wrong because it only talks about the time flaw, whereas that may be present in the stimulus in relation to the romance novels being stale, but that flaw is not present for ALL the examples (e.g. the failure of the psych novel or the lack of social significance for the contemp action novel). Another thing to keep in mind is not to compare the description of the words (which could easily lead you to thinking flaw = fault), but think about what the relationship is.

I got the part about switching the order between the two right in my mind, but when I looked at the answer choices I got distracted by all the other red herring options. How to avoid!!

Another thing to look for is sample. For all the non-causal, the terms "every" or "all" or "most" appear, which indicates that there is a specific group and therefore that it relates just to them, which is why it's a correlation, whereas all the other ones are sure facts without subsets.