The author suggested residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green in the next mayoral election. The reasons are Ann will solve the environmental problems because she is a member of the Good Earth Coalition and that the current government didn’t protect Clearview’s environment. After further consideration, I find some flaws in this conclusion. The current members of government are not protecting the environment, which do not mean Frank Braun does not protect it. The council has a lot of members who may mostly object to protect the surrounding but Frank may try his best to convince the council by the end of failure. If Ann is elected to be mayor, she may face the same situation and fail at the end. So the conclusion is problematic in that if Ann will really change the situation. The author set some examples to illustrate the damage of the environment, like the number of factories was doubled and the number of patients with respiratory illness increased by 25%. The increased factories may not cause serious pollution and even though they are harmful to the nature, the responsibility may not attribute to Frank because he didn’t have the ability to decide which can be built in Clearview. The increase in respiratory illness may relate with the work the patients did and the damage of environment before. Nowadays, the government may have already taken some measures to solve the environmental problems, and slow down the speed of increase of patients. So these evidences are not enough to stand for the argument. Finally, Ann Green is a member of the Good Earth Coalition. What organization is the Good Earth Coalition? We cannot judge it from its name but its movements. And whether Ann Green herself in the organization played a part in protection of environment is questionable. Maybe she just attended in it but didn’t join in any activity. In conclusion, the suggestion of author is unreasonable. A lot of investigations are needed to make and only when we get accurate proof, can the argument make sense.