Passage Summary: A newspaper claimed a government department is now spending five times as much money to do the exact same job they did years ago. A letter writer argues that just because the budget went up doesn't mean they are doing the same amount of work for more money.

Conclusion: The editorial is wrong to claim the department is spending five times more money to perform the same duties.

Reasoning: The only evidence provided for the editorial's claim is that the budget increased from $100,000 to $524,000.

Analysis: The letter writer is attacking the editorial's assumption that the 'duties' stayed the same. To strengthen the letter's position, we need to provide a reason why that budget increase might be justified. Perhaps the department took on many more responsibilities, or perhaps the cost of materials skyrocketed. Look for an answer that suggests the department's workload has increased or that external costs (like inflation) account for the higher spending. We want to show that the 'same duties' part of the editorial's claim is likely false.