Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT107 S1 Q1 Explanation

Politician: The funding for the new

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsAgree/Disagree

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Politician: The funding for the new nationwide health-awareness campaign should come from an increase in taxes on cigarettes. It is well established that cigarette smoking causes many serious health problems, and it is only reasonable that people whose should bear the costs of that campaign.

Smoker: But it is equally well established that regularly eating high-fat, high-cholesterol foods causes as many serious health problems as does smoking, yet is would be manifestly unreasonable to force those the burden of financing this campaign.

What this question is testing

Agree/Disagree

Politician

The politician thinks it's only fair: if your habit causes the problem, you should pay for the campaign to address it. Tax smokers.

Smoker

The smoker doesn't deny smoking is harmful. Instead, the smoker challenges the principle: bad eating habits cause just as many problems, but no one would tax junk food eaters to fund a campaign — that would be unreasonable. By implication, taxing smokers is also unreasonable.

Evaluate

So both agree smoking is harmful. They split on whether the politician's tax-the-cause proposal is reasonable. Politician: yes. Smoker: no, by analogy.

Goal

Find the answer that captures whether the politician's proposal is unreasonable.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
1.

Which one of the following is the point at issue between the politician

Answer choices

  1. Correct80% picked this

    whether the politician’s proposal for financing the health-awareness campaign is an

    Why this is right

    This is the disagreement. The politician explicitly calls the proposal reasonable ("it is only reasonable that..."); the smoker uses the high-fat-food analogy to imply it's unreasonable. They disagree about whether the politician's proposal is unreasonable. Direct hit.

    Skill tested: Agree/Disagree · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  2. Nobody Addresses0% picked this

    whether smokers are more aware of the harmful effects of their habit than are people who regularly

    Neither speaker discusses what smokers or high-fat-food eaters know about their habits' harms. The dispute is about the policy, not about awareness levels among consumers. Off-topic.

  3. Both Agree2% picked this

    whether the effects of smoking constitute a greater health hazard than do the effects of regularly

    The smoker says high-fat-food consumption causes "as many serious health problems" as smoking — i.e., they're comparable. The politician doesn't deny this. The two don't disagree about which is the bigger health hazard.

  4. Nobody Addresses10% picked this

    whether it is unreasonable to require people who do not benefit from certain governmental programs to share the

    This is a broader principle about people who don't benefit from programs sharing in the costs. Neither speaker takes a clear position on it. The politician's reasoning is "those who cause the problem should bear the cost," not about benefit-sharing. The smoker invokes an analogy, not a general principle about non-beneficiaries.

  5. Nobody Addresses8% picked this

    whether the proposed increase on cigarette taxes is an efficient means of financing

    Neither speaker discusses efficiency. The politician argues the tax is reasonable on cause-and-effect grounds; the smoker counters by analogy on fairness grounds. Whether the tax is an efficient means of financing is a separate question neither raises.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free