Q4 - The government's proposed 8 percent cut

[WaltGrace1983]

Last year, there was an 8% cut in arts groups
+
Last year, groups survived
+
This year, there is a proposed 8% cut
-->
(Like last year) Arts groups will still survive

The problem is that we don't know if the arts groups can HANDLE another 8% cut. This argument is essentially assuming that one 8% cut is equivalent to another 8% cut. That may not be true. Maybe this proposed 8% cut would bring them below the threshold of survival.

(A) We don't know how the economy has any bearing on this argument. Eliminate.

(B) We don't care about "should." We don't care about opinion. We want facts! Eliminate.

(C) Nowhere is "flourishing" discussed. Eliminate.

(D) This is a very tempting answer because this gets at the very common numbers/percentages LSAT flaw. However, I don't think raw numbers are relevant here. The author is just assuming that 8% cut last year = 8% cut this year.

(E) This is a bit more clunky than what I expected. However, it gets the job done. (E) basically states that the author overlooks the idea that THESE PROPOSED CUTS might bring the groups under the threshold of being able to survive. Correct.