Question 14·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Policy analyst Maria Santos contends that the only environmental reforms that endure are those that align immediate economic incentives with long-term ecological goals. She praises municipal programs that reward households for reducing waste, arguing that such “small wins” gradually shift cultural attitudes. Santos warns that overly ambitious legislation often collapses under its own complexity, undermining public trust in future initiatives.
Text 2
In a recent editorial, climate activist Ravi Das insists that incrementalism is a “dangerous illusion.” Citing accelerating greenhouse-gas measurements, he calls for governments to enact sweeping carbon taxes and prohibit the sale of gasoline vehicles within the decade. Das concedes the political obstacles but claims that anything less than rapid, comprehensive action amounts to “polite surrender to catastrophe.”
Question
Based on the texts, how would Santos most likely respond to Das’s proposed strategy?
For cross-text connection questions, quickly summarize each author’s stance in a short phrase (e.g., “Santos: gradual, incentive-based; Das: urgent, sweeping mandates”). Then ask, “If Author 1 read Author 2, would they agree, disagree, or raise a specific concern?” Use that prediction to test each answer choice, eliminating any option that contradicts explicit statements in the texts—especially strong words like “endorse,” “ineffective,” or “underestimate”—and choose the one that best matches the relationship between their views, not just one text in isolation.
Hints
Locate each person’s core view
First, in each text, underline or note the sentence that best sums up the author’s main idea about how environmental policy should work.
Focus on Santos’s attitude toward different types of reforms
In Text 1, pay special attention to what Santos praises (what kind of programs she likes) and what she warns against (what kind of legislation worries her).
Contrast Santos’s approach with Das’s approach
In Text 2, look for words like “incrementalism,” “sweeping,” and the specific policies Das wants. Then ask: does this sound more like the kind of approach Santos supports, or the kind she cautions against?
Test choices against both texts
Eliminate any choice that contradicts Santos’s clearly stated views in Text 1, even if it sounds like it fits Das. The correct answer must reflect Santos’s likely reaction to Das’s plan.
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand what the question is asking
The question asks: Based on the texts, how would Santos most likely respond to Das’s proposed strategy? This means you must:
- Use Santos’s views in Text 1 to predict her reaction to
- Das’s proposals in Text 2, not just restate what either one says alone.
Summarize Santos’s main position (Text 1)
Focus on the key lines about Santos:
- She says lasting reforms are those that align immediate economic incentives with long-term ecological goals.
- She praises small, reward-based municipal programs as “small wins” that shift cultural attitudes over time.
- She warns that overly ambitious legislation often collapses under its own complexity, which then undermines public trust in future efforts.
So Santos favors incremental, incentive-based changes and is skeptical of big, complex, ambitious laws that may fail.
Summarize Das’s main position (Text 2)
Now look at Das:
- He says incrementalism is a “dangerous illusion.”
- He wants governments to enact sweeping carbon taxes and ban gasoline vehicle sales within the decade.
- He admits there are political obstacles but insists that anything less than rapid, comprehensive action is “polite surrender to catastrophe.”
So Das rejects gradual change and calls for rapid, large-scale, aggressive policies, even though they are politically difficult.
Infer how Santos would likely react to Das
Compare their views:
- Santos likes small wins and warns that overly ambitious legislation can collapse and hurt public trust.
- Das wants sweeping taxes and bans very quickly and dismisses incremental approaches.
From this, it is reasonable to infer that Santos would:
- See Das’s goals (addressing climate change) as serious and well meant.
- But worry that his sweeping, rapid proposals might be too ambitious, risk failing politically or practically, and could undermine trust if they collapse.
Keep this prediction in mind as you test each answer choice.
Match the inference to the best answer choice
Now evaluate each option against the prediction:
- Choice A says she would endorse his proposals because they align with her belief in economic incentives. But Das is calling for sweeping taxes and bans, not the kind of small, incentive-based programs Santos praises. She also warns against overly ambitious legislation, so she would not simply endorse his plan.
- Choice C says she would think his proposals underestimate the urgency. Das already argues things are extremely urgent; there is no sign Santos thinks he is not urgent enough.
- Choice D claims she would say incremental consumer programs are ineffective without big regulations like Das’s. That is the opposite of what she says—she praises small, incremental programs and warns against large, complex laws.
The remaining choice is the one that says Santos would see Das’s sweeping proposals as well intentioned but likely to fail because they move faster and more aggressively than people and politics can realistically handle. That matches her warning about overly ambitious, complex legislation collapsing and harming public trust, so that is the correct answer (Choice B).