PrepTest 157, Section 1, Question 22
Some environmentalists claim that the higher the international(435 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(20 more words not shown)
- Aoptimism that they(7 more words not shown)
- Bconcern that governments(9 more words not shown)
- Cinsistence upon restricting(6 more words not shown)
- Dconviction that they(5 more words not shown)
- Eskepticism about whether(5 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
A spending cut can remove an environmental benefit or prevent an environmental harm. The author gives both possibilities: a government might stop funding useful programs, but it might instead abandon damaging projects or subsidies. That supports skepticism about an overall negative effect, not a confident prediction of improvement.
Working the answers
- A
Possible benefits aren't enough for this optimism. The author leaves the overall effect unresolved rather than predicting that the cuts will enhance quality of life.
- B
Political willingness to cut spending isn't discussed. The question here is what the cuts would do, not whether governments can bring themselves to make them.
- C
The author doesn't recommend restricting cuts to health care and education. Those appear among the useful programs that could lose funding.
- D
No time limit is proposed. We aren't told that the cuts need last only briefly.
- ECorrect
The author doubts that the consequences are predominantly negative because some cuts may restrain environmentally harmful activity. For example, eliminating a pesticide subsidy could reduce a source of harm. That is enough to challenge the environmentalists' one-sided account without claiming that all cuts are good.
More Author's Opinion questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Author's Opinion questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.