Jonathan Evans wrote:
While the legislator does identify the grounds on which the colleague claims the act should be rejected, the legislator does not "address" these grounds.
In your explanation above, I'm not fully understanding how/why you made a distinction between "identify" and "address". In this context, the two words are synonyms. "Address" could mean to "briefly touch on" or to "mention".
As we all know, LSAT writers frequently use synonyms as a way to cause confusion, change the look of a phrase, or because the sky is blue. In reading answer choice B), I specifically crossed it out because I took "address the grounds" to mean "call attention to", or "identify" the grounds, or the "reason", for rejecting the act. In the first sentence, the legislator does exactly this - "because it would deter investment".
It's not as though the legislator said "My colleague says we should reject this act," and left it at that. The legislator doesn't go into full detail, but that isn't to be expected in an LR stimulus.
As you also mentioned, there are PLENTY of flaws in the legislator's argument, but I cannot understand how B is one of them.
How do you recommend I look at this question differently to see what you are seeing?