|
Q24 to Q27:
In 1938, at the government-convened
National Health Conference, organized labor
emerged as a major proponent of legislation
Line to guarantee universal health care in the
(5) United States. The American Medical
Association, representing physicians’
interests, argued for preserving physicians’
free-market prerogatives. Labor activists
countered these arguments by insisting that
(10) health care was a fundamental right that
should be guaranteed by government
programs.
The labor activists’ position represented
a departure from the voluntarist view held
(15) until 1935 by leaders of the American
Federation of labor (AFL), a leading affili-
ation of labor unions; the voluntarist view
stressed workers’ right to freedom from
government intrusions into their lives and
(20) represented national health insurance as a
threat to workers’ privacy. AFL president
Samuel Gompers, presuming to speak for
all workers, had positioned the AFL as
a leading opponent of the proposals for
(25) national health insurance that were advo-
cated beginning in 1915 by the American
Association for Labor Legislation (AALL),
an organization dedicated to the study and
reform of labor laws. Gompers’ opposition
(30) to national health insurance was partly
principled, arising from the premise that
governments under capitalism invariably
served employers’, not workers’, interests.
Gompers feared the probing of government
(35) bureaucrats into workers’ lives, as well as
the possibility that government-mandated
health insurance, financed in part by
employers, could permit companies to
require employee medical examinations
(40) that might be used to discharge disabled
workers.
Yet the AFL’s voluntarism had accom-
modated certain exceptions: the AFL had
supported government intervention on behalf
(45) of injured workers and child laborers. AFL
officials drew the line at national health
insurance, however, partly out of concern
for their own power. The fact that AFL
outsiders such as the AALL had taken the
(50) most prominent advocacy roles antagonized
Gompers. That this reform threatened union-
sponsored benefit programs championed by
Gompers made national health insurance
even more objectionable.
(55) Indeed, the AFL leadership did face
serious organizational divisions. Many
unionists, recognizing that union-run health
programs covered only a small fraction of
union members and that unions represented
(60) only a fraction of the nation’s workforce,
worked to enact compulsory health
insurance in their state legislatures. This
activism and the views underlying it came to
prevail in the United States labor movement
(65) and in 1935 the AFL unequivocally reversed
its position on health legislation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q24:
The passage suggests which of the following about the voluntarist view held by leaders of the AFL regarding health care?
It was opposed by the AALL.
It was shared by most unionists until 1935.
It antagonized the American Medical Association.
It maintained that employer-sponsored health care was preferable to union-run health programs.
It was based on the premise that the government should protect child laborers but not adult workers.
Answer: C
见21－27行
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q25:
The primary purpose of the passage is to
account for a labor organization’s success in achieving a particular goal
discuss how a labor organization came to reverse its position on a particular issue
explain how disagreement over a particular issue eroded the power of a labor organization
outline the arguments used by a labor organization’s leadership in a particular debate
question the extent to which a labor organization changed its position on a particular issue
Answer: B
为什么不是C？
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q26:
Which of the following best describes the function of the sentence in lines 42-45 (“Yet … child laborers”)?
It elaborates a point about why the AFL advocated a voluntarist approach to health insurance.
It identifies issues on which the AFL took a view opposed to that of the AALL.
It introduces evidence that appears to be inconsistent with the voluntarist view held by AFL leaders.
It suggests that a view described in the previous sentence is based on faulty evidence.
It indicates why a contradiction described in the previous paragraph has been overlooked by historians.
Answer: C
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q27:
According to the passage, Gompers’ objection to national health insurance was based in part on his belief that
union-sponsored health programs were less expensive than government-sponsored programs
most unionists were covered by and satisfied with union-sponsored health programs
it would lead some employers to reduce company-sponsored benefits
it could result in certain workers unfairly losing their jobs
the AFL should distance itself from the views of the American Medical Association
Answer: D
见34－41行
做对的大家看看理由对吗
做错的，麻烦指点下为什么错了：） | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-11-11 21:03:00
