Part B. Premises or Logic Tell me whether the responding claims (Speaker B) in the following problems challenge the truth of the premises or the logical implications in the initial set of claims (Speaker A). 1. Speaker A: According to the California High Speed Rail Authority, by 2030, using 100% renewable energy, the high-speed rail network will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by twelve billion pounds per year. It follows that building high speed rail is the best way for California to make significant and worthwhile improvements in reducing its carbon footprint Speaker B: Hold on a second. Even granting your twelve-billion-pound estimate, there are a lot less costly ways to achieve the same benefits in CO2 reductions, so high-speed rail hardly seems the best approach to reducing greenhouse gases. 2. Speaker A: If a government safety program is ineffective, counter-productive, or unnecessary, then it should not be enacted. The Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare", is obviously ineffective, counter-productive, and unnecessary, so it should be repealed. Speaker B: With over 45 million Americans without health insurance, I don't see how you could say that health care reform was unnecessary. And since "Obamacare" was passed in 2010, there has been a decrease of 20 million in the number of uninsured, so it seems to be working pretty well