LSAT 134 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q10

LR Question 10 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: In order to reduce traffic congestion and raise revenue …

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption

CONCLUSION: The downtown driving charge won’t be enforced effectively when it’s first introduced.

REASONING: The enforcement system won’t be ready until the end of next year. Without it, many people will avoid paying the charge.

ANALYSIS: The enforcement system won’t be ready until the end of next year. Without that system, many people won’t pay. So, when the plan is first introduced, payment won’t be enforced effectively.

But wait. There seems to be an obvious gap.

How do we know the plan will be introduced before the enforcement system is ready?

Maybe the city is simply waiting until the system is finished. That seems like the reasonable option to do anyway.

If that’s true, then when the plan is first implemented, the system will be available, and the conclusion falls apart.

So the argument must assume that the charge will be introduced before the enforcement system is ready.

___________

1. CORRECT. The argument only works if the charge is introduced before the enforcement system is ready. If it’s introduced after the enforcement system is complete, then the conclusion makes no sense.
   Negation: The mayor’s plan will not be implemented before the end of next year.
2. The conclusion is about whether the charge can be enforced, not the city’s finances. Whether the city runs a budget deficit doesn’t affect the argument.
   Negation: The city will not incur a budget deficit if it doesn’t raise the expected revenue.
3. Tempting trap. This tells us what SHOULD happen. The argument is about what WILL happen, not what the city ought to do. Whether the plan should wait is irrelevant.
   Negation: The plan should not be implemented as soon as the enforcement system is ready.
4. The argument is only about enforcement. It never compares the importance of raising revenue versus reducing congestion.
   Negation: Raising revenue is not more important than reducing traffic congestion.
5. The conclusion doesn’t depend on whether this charge is the best way to reduce congestion. It’s not comparing it to other methods. It only depends on whether the payment can actually be enforced.
   Negation: The charge is not the most effective way to reduce traffic congestion.