Valitania’s long-standing practice of

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

TopicsWeaken

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

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

Valitania’s long-standing practice of paying high salaries to its elected politicians has had a disastrous effect on the level of integrity among politicians in that country. This is because the prospect of earning a high salary is always attractive to anyone whose primary aim in life is to make money, so that interested in making money than in serving the needs of the nation.

What this question is testing

Weaken

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion less likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that look negative but attack a claim the argument never relied on.

Winning move

Find the assumption the argument depends on, then pick the choice that undermines it.

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

The question

19.

Which one of the following, if true, would weaken

Answer choices

No Impact2% picked this
Many Valitanian candidates for elected office spend some of their own money to
The fact that candidates spend their own money on campaigns does not address whether the prospect of a high salary attracts individuals of low integrity. It doesn't directly address the causal connection proposed in the conclusion.
2%
No Impact0% picked this
Most Valitanian elective offices have four-year
The length of elective office terms does not provide insight on whether salary levels affect the type of individuals attracted to politics or their integrity levels.
0%
Weaker Impact21% picked this
No more people compete for elected office when officeholders are paid well than when they
This seems to suggest that salary level doesn't really entice people to run for office. They are apparently deciding on things other than salary. That does seem to weaken the author's concern that high salaries will bring sleazy money-hungry types out of the woodwork, who otherwise wouldn't be messing around in politics. But this doesn't seem to have as much impact as the correct answer, which more directly challenges the idea that high salaries entice shallow people to run for office.
21%
Opposite (if anything)2% picked this
Only politicians who rely on their offices for income tend to support policies that advance
This rule sort of reinforces the connection between getting elected for the money ("relying on their office for income") and not serving the nation ("supporting policies that advance their own selfish interests"). So if anything it strengthens.
2%
Correct75% picked this
Most of those who are currently Valitanian politicians could have obtained better-paid
Why this is right
If most Valitanian politicians could have obtained better-paid work outside politics, it suggests that these high salaries are not going to be a compelling incentive for entering politics. This basically goes against the author's intermediate conclusion / premise that "these high salaries have surely attracted money-hungry people into politics".
Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
75%

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