PrepTest 117

[lcid:3567] Prep Test 117 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Political scientist: One of Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Facts

Valid or Flawed

NA

Question Type

Argument Completion Questions

Stimulus Summary

Dilemma - People should be able to spend their money how they want, but spending a lot on campaigns gives an unfair advantage.
Democracy - Must ensure that all voices are equally heard, but governments shouldn’t subsidize campaigns
Therefore - __________

Answer Anticipation

The argument presents a dilemma/problem - people should be able to spend money how they want, including on political campaigns, but that creates an unfair advantage for rich candidates. And it’s important for all voices to be heard equally, despite this difference in electoral chances for spending more money.
No matter what your own thoughts are on a solution here, the Political Scientist rules one out - the government subsidizing expensive campaigns for all candidates. So the resolution presented in the conclusion - what we’re tasked with finding in the correct answer - will have to be another solution here. If we’re not going to subsidize the cost of these campaigns, then there has to be some other way to ensure that “all voices have an equal chance to be heard.”

Answer choices

  1. A
    only candidates with significant Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    This answer wouldn’t ensure that all voices have an equal chance to be heard - it would mean that those with significant campaign resources have an exclusive change to be heard over those who don’t.
  2. B
    an upper limit on Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    This answer presents another solution to the issue at hand, ensuring equality. If an upper limit is placed on campaign spending, then people can still have their voice heard, and this rule would apply equally to all. This is therefore the correct answer.
  3. C
    government subsidization of all Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    The argument rules out subsidies for campaigns. Though it does specifically state “expensive” campaigns, it would be weird to pivot from that to this answer. Additionally, in funding a “low percentage” of each campaign, the issue with the vast discrepancy in spending - thus still allowing some people to have an unequal voice - would persist.
  4. D
    all wealthy persons should Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    In applying only to the wealthy, this solution actually creates an unequal voice for that group!
  5. E
    each candidate should be Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    While this answer feels like it’s ensuring equality, it’s not. In “allow[ing]” that much to be spent, it’s not guaranteeing that the candidate has the ability to do so, and thus those with more resources would still have an unequal voice.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion