question about parallelism

[allandu]

Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than nonunion members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each.
A. imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend
B. imposing stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients, and spending
C. that impose stricter limits on medical services, require doctors to see more patients, and spend
D. that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending
E. that impose stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients and spending

Hi Ron,

in a previous post http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/among-lower-paid-workers-union-members-are-less-likely-t1904.html
you said in choice A, spend is not parallel to any thing. but could it be possibly parallel to "to see", as "to" can sometimes be ignored in a parallel structure.
Thanks in advance!

Allan

[RonPurewal]

Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than nonunion members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend less time with each.
A. imposing stricter limits on medical services and requiring doctors to see more patients, and spend
B. imposing stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients, and spending
C. that impose stricter limits on medical services, require doctors to see more patients, and spend
D. that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending
E. that impose stricter limits on medical services, requiring doctors to see more patients and spending

Hi Ron,

in a previous post http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/among-lower-paid-workers-union-members-are-less-likely-t1904.html
you said in choice A, spend is not parallel to any thing. but could it be possibly parallel to "to see", as "to" can sometimes be ignored in a parallel structure.
Thanks in advance!

Allan

if you're citing the previous post, why aren't you posting your question on that thread? we really don't want to have a bunch of separate threads for the same problem; that would make the forum difficult, or even impossible, to search effectively.

please re-post this question on the thread (whose link you provided above) and then we'll address it. thanks.