Cause & Effect — Policy change vs migration trend. I. The United States revised its employment-visa limits for immigrants after approval by its national legislature. II. The number of Indian IT professionals seeking U.S. employment has steadily increased over the years.

Introduction / Context:We compare a formal policy revision (I) to a long-run labor-supply trend (II). The stem explicitly attributes I to a legislative approval, not to migration flows. We must identify the immediate cause of I and whether II directly causes it.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: U.S. visa limits changed following the national assembly’s approval.
• II: Indian IT professionals’ interest in U.S. jobs has risen steadily.
• Policy changes often arise from multifactor legislative processes.

Concept / Approach:The stem’s phrasing “following the approval” identifies the immediate cause of I: legislative approval. While migration pressures (including II) can be a background consideration, they are not stated as the direct/immediate cause.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:Even if II influenced debates, the immediate, decisive act remains the legislature’s approval.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:A/B invert or mis-assign causality; D wrongly asserts II as effect.

Common Pitfalls:Confusing contributing background trends with immediate causes identified in the stem.

Final Answer:If I is the effect but II is not its direct/immediate cause.