The American economy is growing, according to the most recent statistics, at the sizzling rate of 7%, and is in the middle of the largest peacetime expansion in American history. We read in the newspapers that practically everyone who wants a job can get one. Microsoft is running advertisements in the New York Times practically begging Congress to issue more visas for foreign computer and information technology workers. In this environment, it is shocking that one group of Americans, people with disabilities, have such a high level of unemployment: 30% are not employed the same percentage as when the Americans with Disabilities Act became law. Not only did their employment and labor earnings fall during the recession of the early 1990s, but employment and earnings continued to fall during the long economic expansion that followed. Many of these people are skilled professionals who are highly marketable in today"s economy. Part of the problem is discrimination, and part recent court rulings favoring employers in ADA lawsuits. Discrimination against people with disabilities is, unfortunately, alive and well, despite the legal prohibitions against discrimination in hiring people with disabilities. 79% of disabled people who are unemployed cite discrimination in the workplace and lack of transportation as major factors that prevent them from working. Studies have also shown that people with disabilities who find jobs earn less than their co-workers, and are less likely to be promoted. Unfavorable court rulings have not been helpful, either. Research by law professor Ruth Colker of Ohio State University has shown that in the eight years after the ADA went into effect, employer-defendants prevailed in more than 93% of the eases decided by trial. Of the cases appealed, employers prevailed 84% of the time. Robert Burgdorf, Ir., who helped draft the ADA, has written, "legal analysis has proceeded quite a way down the wrong road". Disability activists and other legal scholars point out that Congress intended the ADA as a national mandate for the ending of discrimination against people-with disabilities. Instead, what has occurred, in the words of one writer, is that the courts "have narrowed the scope of the law, redefined "disability," raised the price of access to justice and generally deemed disability discrimination as not worthy of serious remedy". But perhaps the greatest single problem is the federal government itself, where laws and regulations designed to help disabled people actually provide an economic disincentive to work. As Sen. Edward Kennedy wrote, "the high unemployment rate among people receiving federal disability benefits is not because their federal benefits programs have "front doors that are too big", but because they have "back doors that are too small"".
单选题 The advertisement made by Microsoft shows that _____.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】解析:细节题。文章第一段讲的主题就是第一句话的内容,即"美国经济在增长",然后举了微软强烈要求国会给外国工人签发签证的广告为例来说明美国经济在增长,只有"美国国内产生了大量就业机会"符合这一主题。
单选题 It can be inferred from the second paragraph that _____.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:推理题。文章第二段冒号后面说:30%的残疾人没有工作,这一比率和美国残疾人法案被通过成为法律时的比率一样。证明残疾人立法没能有效地帮助残疾人。A错误因为30%的失业率不能说成大部分人失业。C错误是因为第二段中说"在90年代的萧条时期,残疾人收入在下滑,而在90年代以后长期的经济增长中他们的收入还在持续下滑",证明残疾人收入不是随着经济状况而浮动的。D的错误在于第二段末尾说很多残疾人都是技巧熟练的专业人士在现在的经济中应该很有市场,而不是缺乏足够的技能。
单选题 Which of the following is NOT mentioned as a cause to the problems of the disabled?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】解析:判断题。文章第三段倒数第二句说失业的残疾人中79%都认为工厂的歧视和交通的不便是他们找不到工作的主要原因。但是没有提到他们的亲戚没有为他们的交通提供足够帮助。其他3点分别在第三、第四、第五段提到。
单选题 What underlies the courts rulings seems to be that _____.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】解析:细节题。文章第四段末尾一句引用一位作家的话说"法庭把法律的应用范围缩小,重新定义了"残疾",提高了诉讼费用并通常认为对残疾人的歧视没有到值得去寻找严肃解决办法的地步"。证明法庭低估了对残疾人的歧视。
单选题 The last sentence "but because they have back doors that are too small" probably means that _____.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:含义题。文章说"很多拿到联邦残疾人救济金的人失业率很高不是因为联邦救济金项目的"前门太大"(象征对领救济金的人的要求较高),而是因为这些项目的"后门太小"(象征一旦进去,很难出来)"。也就是说一旦这些人上了名单就很难从名单上下来去找工作了,也就是说残疾人变得对救济金有太强的依赖性以至于不愿工作了。