Let's analyze the argument in the passage. The conclusion is that the expectation that the corporation's board of directors will safeguard the economic health of the corporation by setting the salaries of executives is based on poor reasoning. Why? Because even though the corporation's board of directors are not executives of the corporation for which they sit on the board, they're still executives of other corporations, and thus, they can expect to benefit from setting generous benchmarks for executives' salaries as a whole.
Answer choice (A) is similar in that we are talking about physicians not directly involved in a suit having a major role in determining the damages in a medical malpractice suit. The same criticism can be used here. Even though the physicians being discussed do not have direct involvement in the suit, determining damages in favor of the physicians who are directly involved will benefit them by setting a benchmark for the amount of damages given in medical malpractice suits as a whole.
Answer choice (B) is not correct because it is not discussing legislators of a different legislature. The legislators in question are going to be increasing their OWN salaries as opposed to salaries of legislators in different legislatures.
Hope that helped! Let us know if you have any other questions!
