Consumer advocate: There is no doubt that the government

The correct answer is A, and not B. So, B is in fact not a much better option.
The problem with B is with the word "unforeseen", and we have no clue from the argument whether government expected or did not expected the price increase. All we know that the government took some initiative and its associated result.

I still didn't get why E is not the answer.

Due to gov policies demand increased and also the price of fuel. So the assumption could be if policies didn't have effect on fuel demand then price could be stable.

Where did i missed my logic? egmat

Two primary reasons,
1. The correct answer in an assumption question must connect the premise and the conclusion, or work within the gap between the premise and the conclusion.
The main conclusion is : "There is no doubt that the government is responsible for the increased cost of gasoline", so the correct one must, in some way, relate to this conclusion. E deals only with the premise.
2. E can also be treated as out of scope.
The primary condition of the argument: "government’s policies that have significantly increased consumer demand for fuel", while E changes the condition to "government pursues policies that do not increase the demand for fuel".
Eliminate E



No.
"If the government’s policies have significantly increased consumer demand for fuel, the price of gasoline will rise steadily". is not same as,
"If the government’s policies have not significantly increased consumer demand for fuel, the price of gasoline will rise steadily". Either consider it from #2 above that changes the condition, or consider it from "If X, then Y" is not equal to "if not X, then Y"
the correct one would be,
"If the price of gasoline did not rise steadily, the government’s policies would not have significantly increased consumer demand for fuel". But, in this question this would also have been incorrect as #1.

courtesy : PowerScore

Assumption—CE. The correct answer choice is (A)

The premises suggest that the government’s policies caused an increase in the demand for fuel, which—in turn—caused the price of gasoline to rise. The consumer advocate concludes that the government is therefore responsible for the increased cost of gasoline.

There is a distinct logical gap in this argument. While the government may have directly caused the increase in consumer demand and therefore indirectly caused the increase in gas prices, this does not automatically imply that the government is responsible for the increase in prices. “Responsibility” is a rogue term in the conclusion, and the assumption of this argument is likely to play a Supporter role by connecting responsibility to the fact that the government indirectly caused gas prices to increase.

Answer Choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. This answer choice is a classic Supporter Assumption that connects the premises to the conclusion. In order to establish that the government bears responsibility for increased gas prices even though they only indirectly caused the increase in gas prices, the government must be able to bear responsibility for things they indirectly cause. Applying the Assumption Negation Technique, if the government cannot bear responsibility for things they indirectly cause, such a government would not be held responsible for the increase in gas prices.

Answer Choice (B): The information in this answer choice is extraneous to the argument. The rise in gas prices may have been a foreseeable consequence of the government’s policies. Since this answer choice does not necessarily apply to the argument, it is not required for the argument to be true.

Answer Choice (C): This answer choice suggests that an increase in consumer demand for gasoline requires an increase in gasoline prices. While increased consumer demand caused a rise in gasoline prices, the author does not have to assume that the former requires the latter. Causal arguments rarely assume conditional relationships. Furthermore, this answer choice does not attempt to link the “rogue” term in the conclusion to the rest of the argument.

Answer Choice (D): This answer choice strengthens the argument by outlining the government’s obligation to ensure that demand for fuel does not increase excessively. However, the author does not need to assume that the government has this obligation. Even if the government did not have an obligation to prevent excessive increases in the demand for fuel, they might still be responsible for the increase in fuel prices.

Answer Choice (E): The government did pursue policies that increased the demand for fuel, so this answer choice does not apply to the stimulus. Also, the author already established that increased consumer demand caused the increase in fuel prices. The author does not need to assume any additional connection between these two premises.

A fun and challenging LSAT assumption question that I am bumping for discussion.

Choosing an answer after spending 3min on it and it ends up irrevant ???

Posted from my mobile device

Why do I find A and D parallel?
If government has no obligation to control demand, then how can it be held responsible for an increased price which is an effect of demand?
Also, if we apply the negation test to option E,
'If the government pursues policies that increase the demand for fuel, gasoline prices tend to remain stable'....This goes against the arguement
Where am I going wrong?

To differentiate between answers (A), (D), and (E), remember that the question asks us to find an "assumption required by the consumer advocate’s argument." This means that for the argument to be logically sound, the correct answer choice must be true.

First, let's take a look at the key pieces of the passage:

• The advocate concludes that " the government is responsible for the increased cost of gasoline."
• She/he supports that conclusion by stating that "the government’s policies have significantly increased consumer demand for fuel, and as a result of increasing demand, the price of gasoline has risen steadily."

Now, apply this understanding to the answer choices in question:

The author states that government policies have increased consumer demand for fuel, and this in turn has caused the price of gasoline to increase. Notice that the increase in price of gasoline is an indirect result of the government's policies. The author then concludes that the government is responsible for the increased cost of gasoline. For this conclusion to be logically sound, it is necessary to establish the government can, in fact, bear responsibility for that which it indirectly causes.

Answer choice (A) must be true in order for the argument to be logically sound, so (A) is the correct answer.

Now take another look at (D):

The advocate's argument makes a claim about what the government has done, not what the the government has an obligation to do. Whether or not the government "has an obligation to ensure that demand for fuel does not increase excessively," the fact remains that government’s policies have increased consumer demand for fuel, and as a result of increasing demand, the price of gasoline has risen steadily. Based on this, the advocate concludes that the government is responsible for the increase in fuel prices.

The advocate may well agree with the sentiment of answer choice (D), but it is not an assumption required by his/her argument. (D) is out.


You state in your analysis that negating (E) "goes against the argument." Remember that we are not looking to strengthen or support the argument -- we are looking for an assumption required by the argument. Because the argument does not depend on the information in (E) (what if, for example, gasoline prices decrease if the government pursues policies that do not increase demand?), this is not an assumption required by the argument. So we can eliminate (E).

I hope this helps!

Initally I thought the answer was "A", however when i saw "can bear", i eliminated A.

I think correct version should have been "Government is responsible" what does can bear mean ? has the capacity to bear responsibility as in Public Litigation or some public outcry leading to lack of votes ?

As this is LSAT question, I think i'll have to accept the answer here.

My pre-thinking was if the govt. had not selected the policies it did then demand for fuel would not increase and consequently the price would not rise too. In short policies is the cause.

Negated : Govt shouldn't be blamed in a situation in which without its policies the demand of fuel would still rise.

Which is why I selected E.

Where did I went wrong?

Hi Rounak

The stimulus tells us that, "the government’s policies (X) have significantly increased consumer demand for fuel (Y)". In other words X --> Y. This does not mean that X is the only cause of Y or Y can only be caused by X. Your claim that " if the govt. had not selected the policies it did then demand for fuel would not increase" is not supported by the facts in the stimulus.

To elaborate, yes, policies have caused price rise but we cannot state that they are the only cause based on the information given in the stimulus. Therefore, we cannot be sure that without such policies, the price would not rise.

Hope this helps.

Policy change -> Increase in Demand for Fuel -> Increased Prices -> Government Fault. Why government fault?

(A) Negate the statement: The government can't bear responsibility for what it indirectly causes. Then it can also never be the governments fault, as it indirectly (knowingly or not) cause an increase in price. Correct

(B) We don't know if the consequences, namely the fuel price increasing, was unforeseen or not. Out

(C) (no increase in demand -> no increase in price) <-> increase in price -> increase in demand. This tells us nothing about why it could be the governments fault. Out

(D) We don't know if they increased excessively or just increased by a small amount daily. Out

(E) (Non-demand increasing policy -> stable prices) <-> unstable prices -> demand increasing policy. It could be that the prices are unstable in that they drop every day by a significant percentage, but that wouldn't imply that the demand increased necessarily

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.