|
我就顺便把原题答案贴出来吧O(∩_∩)O~ 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.
AFL president Samuel Gompers, presuming to speak for all workers, had positioned the AFL as a leading opponent of the proposals for national health insurance that were advocated beginning in 1915 by the American Association for Labor Legislation (AALL) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
the AFL’s voluntarism had accommodated certain exceptions: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
Gompers’ opposition 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 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 that might be used to discharge disabled workers. |