This is an Argument Structure question. We are asked to determine what the role of the following statement is playing in the argument: "they tend not to reelect inactive politicians."
The conclusion of the argument is: "voters often reelect politicians whose behavior they resent."
Why? We are told that though people complain about government intervention in their lives, they tend not to reelect inactive politicians. We also know that a "politician's activity consists largely in the passage of laws whose enforcement affects voters' lives."
So the statement we are focusing on explains how people usually do not reelect inactive politicians, i.e. they reelect the active ones. However, we know that politician's activity consists largely in the passage of laws whose enforcement affects voters' lives. And we know that people complain about government intervention in their lives. Therefore, voters often reelect politicians whose behavior they resent.
Thus, the statement claiming that people tend not to reelect inactive politicians helps support the conclusion of the passage, i.e. answer choice (B): "It is a premise offered in support of the conclusion that voters often reelect politicians whose behavior they resent."
Hope that helped! Please let us know if you have any more questions.
