Passage 1: This November, citizens will be voting on whether our town should unearth the old trolley tracks and put in an old-fashioned trolley car system. Trolleys were vital to our city's beginnings, but they are completely outdated now. Although the electric trolley cars would use clean energy, they would be slow—a giant step backward. Our city has been all about "progress" in this last decade with advances such as our high-speed commuter trains. Why put in a slow, ancient system just so we can remember the good old days? That does not seem like a smart use of tax dollars. It would be far better to invest in more modern buses or add another high-speed rail line—something to move us forward instead of back. Passage 2: Digging up and restoring the trolley tracks for a trolley car line is a brilliant plan. The trolley is an important part of this city's history. What's more, trolleys use electricity, which is clean and green energy! That's more than can be said for our bus system. I hope when people vote this November, they will support this terrific idea. We don't need another high-speed train to zip us to our destination in record time. Instead, we need something to slow us down, to remind us of how life used to be—quieter, less hurried. While our mayor has been emphasizing his own brand of "progress" for years now, it has not improved our quality of life the way a trolley system would. If it gets us to slow down, that will be real progress.

How do the two passages provide different views on trolleys?

Question 5 options:

They differ on whether trolleys are part of the city's history.

They disagree on whether the trolleys use clean energy.

They disagree on whether a trolley system is a good idea.

They differ on whether trolley system would be slower.