Text 1: Historian Park argues that the U.S. interstate highway system, authorized in 1956, was a great triumph of postwar planning. Tens of thousands of miles of high-speed roads transformed commerce, made interstate travel routine, and bound distant regions into a single national market.
Text 2: Historian Singh accepts the system's transformative economic effects but argues that its costs are routinely understated. Black neighborhoods in cities across the country were systematically razed for highway routes; suburban sprawl enabled by the system contributed to environmental costs not foreseen at the time; transit alternatives starved for funds.
Both authors would most likely agree that
- A
the system was small and regionally limited.
- Bcheck_circle
the interstate highway system had transformative consequences.
- C
no urban neighborhoods were affected by highway construction.
- D
the highway system had no economic effects.
Explanation
Both accept the system's transformative consequences; they emphasize different aspects. A is shared. B, C, and D contradict both.