LSAT 123 – Section 3 – Question 19

LSAT 123 - Section 3 - Question 19

June 2007

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:28

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT123 S3 Q19	+LR	Strengthen +Streng Causal Reasoning +CausR Link Assumption +LinkA	A 44% 156 B 15% 148 C 16% 149 D 15% 144 E 10% 148	145 153 162	+Harder	144.044 +SubsectionEasier

Editor: Many candidates say that if elected they will reduce governmental intrusion into voters’ lives. But voters actually elect politicians who instead promise that the government will provide assistance to solve their most pressing problems. Governmental assistance, however, costs money, and money can come only from taxes, which can be considered a form of governmental intrusion. Thus, governmental intrusion into the lives of voters will rarely be substantially reduced over time in a democracy.

Summarize Argument

The editor concludes that government intrusion into voters’ lives will not decrease. This is because voters prefer candidates who say they’ll assist with voters’ biggest issues. Acting on these issues costs the government money, which comes from taxes—a form of intrusion.

Notable Assumptions

The editor assumes politicians who promise to provide government assistance actually deliver on this promise. If they didn’t, there wouldn’t be a need for increased taxes and governmental intrusion.

Politicians who win their elections usually keep their campaign promises.

This strengthens the argument. It supports the editor’s assumption that politicians who promise to provide government assistance actually deliver on this promise.

Politicians never promise what they really intend to do once in office.

This weakens the argument. It exploits the author’s assumption that politicians who promise to provide government assistance will deliver on this promise.

The most common problems people have are financial problems.

This does not affect the argument. Voters prefer candidates who promise to help with their most pressing problems, which don’t also have to be their most common ones. In extension, there is no reason to believe that financial problems are voters’ most pressing problems.

Governmental intrusion into the lives of voters is no more burdensome in nondemocratic countries than it is in democracies.

This does not affect the editor’s argument, which is solely about democracies.

Politicians who promise to do what they actually believe ought to be done are rarely elected.

This does not affect the argument, which doesn’t discuss whether politicians promise to do things they believe should be done—instead, the argument focuses on politicians’ promises and the consequences of them keeping these promises.

LSAT 123 – Section 3 – Question 19

LSAT 123 - Section 3 - Question 19

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 123 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel