单选题
Queuse are long. Life is short. So why waste time waiting when you can pay someone to do it for you? In Washington D. C.—a city that struggles with more than its share of bureaucratic practices—a small industry is emerging that will queue for you to get everything from a driver"s license to a seat in a congressional hearing.
Michael Dorsey, one of the pioneering "service expediters", began going to traffic courts for other people back in 1988. Today his fees start at $ 20 and can go into the thousands to plead individual cases at the Bureau of Traffic Adjudication (his former employer). Mr. Dorsey knows what a properly written parking ticket looks like, and often gets fines invalidated on its failures in formality. His clients include congressmen and diplomats, as well as firms for which tickets are an occupational hazard, such as taxi operators and television broadcasters.
Service expediters are not universally loved. Non-tax income, like fines and fees, makes up about 7% of local-government revenue in Washington. Mr. Dorsey alone relieves that fund of $150, 000 a year. Meanwhile, citizen advocacy groups keep complaining about expediters such as the Congressional Services Company and CVK Group that specialise in saving places for congressional hearings. Committees hearing hot topics such as energy regulation often do not have enough seats. Why should a well-heeled lobbyist who has paid $ 30 an hour to a professional place-holder grab the place? Critics say this perpetuates a two-layered system :the rich get good government service, but the poor still have to wait.
This seems a little harsh. Service expeditors can hardly be blamed for creating the unfair system they profit from. Anyway, it"s not only rich corporate types who benefit from their services. Poor foreigners with little English hire expediters to navigate the ticket-fighting process; so do elderly and disabled people who want to save time on errands that require long hours standing in line.
And, who knows, the service expediters might even shame the bureaucrats into pulling their socks up. Back in 1999, Washington"s mayor, Tony Williams, promised to liberate citizens from the tyranny of the government queue. Things have gotten a bit better, but the 20-minute take of renewing a driver"s license can still take days. Hiring an expert to confront the bureaucratic beast on your behalf takes care of that.
单选题
What is the new business which emerged in Washington D.C.?
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】[解析] 该题为细节题。根据第一段第四句“In Washington D.C. —a city that struggles with more than its share of bureaucratic practices—a small industry is emerging that will queue for you to get everything from a driver"s license to a seat in a congressional hearing.”可知，在华盛顿人们为繁琐的政府办事手续苦恼，因此出现了一个新兴行业，从业者替你排队办理各种手续，包括驾照手续及国会听证会手续，故选D。
单选题
Which of the following is true according to the text?
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】[解析] 该题为细节题。根据第二段第二句“Today his fees start at $20 and can go into the thousands to plead individual cases at the Bureau of Traffic Adjudication (his former employer).”可知，麦克·多斯在交通审判局(他以前的工作单位)为顾客申辩交通案件的收费从20美元起价，最高能达到几千美元，而A项认为对违反交通规则的人的罚金是从20美元到1000美元，不符合文意；根据第二段第四句“His clients include congressmen and diplomats, as well as firms for which tickets are an occupational hazard, such as taxi operators and television broadcasters.”可知，麦克·多斯的委托人包括收到违规停车罚单将会面临职业风险的公司，比如出租车公司和电视广播公司，而B项认为电视广播公司很有可能收到违规停车罚单，不符合文意；根据第二段第三句“Mr. Dorsey knows what a properly written parking ticket looks like, and often gets fines invalidated on its failures in formality.”可知，麦克·多斯知道罚单正确的填写格式，因此很多罚单都由于格式不正确而变得无效，而C项意思与文意相反；根据第二段第二句和第三句可知，由于麦克·多斯以前在交通审判局工作过，因此，他知道罚单正确的填写格式，他经常使罚单因为格式不正确而变得无效，由此可知，麦克·多斯的工作经验帮助了他完成新的工作，故选D。
单选题
This new business is not liked by all partly because
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】[解析] 该题为细节题。A项认为这种新型行业将穷人的缴税负担转移到了富人身上，文中未提到这一观点；根据第三段最后一句“Critics say this perpetuates a two-layered system...”可知，这种新型行业延续了而不是破坏了双层体制，故排除B；根据第三段第二句和第三句“Non-tax income, like fines and fees, makes up about 7% of local-government revenue in Washington. Mr. Dorsey alone relieves that fund of $150,000 a year.”可知，免税收入，比如罚金和各种费用，占华盛顿政府年收入的7%，仅多斯先生一人就使华盛顿政府每年减少了15万美元的收入，因此这种新兴行业损害了政府的利益，故选C；根据第四段可知，服务加速者不应该被指责制造了不公平的体制，不管怎样，他们的委托人不仅仅是富人，他们也帮助几乎不懂英语的可怜的外国人应对罚单申辩程序，并且使老年人和残疾人免去了排队之苦，因此他们并没有破坏平等机会原则，故排除D。
单选题
It can be inferred from the text that service expediters could possibly
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】[解析] 该题为细节题。根据第四段第三句“...so do elderly and disabled people who want to save time on errands that require long hours standing in line.”可知，这些服务加速者代替老年人和残疾人排队，这样老年人和残疾人可以节省排队的时间，A项认为服务加速者可以为老年人和残疾人排忧解难，符合文意；根据第三段第二句和第三句可知，非税金收入，比如罚金，占华盛顿政府年收入的7%，仅多斯先生一人就使华盛顿政府每年减少了15万美元的收入，B项与文意相反；根据最后一段第一句“And, who knows, the service expediters might even shame the bureaucrats into pulling their socks up.”可知，作者认为服务加速者也许能使政府感到羞愧而努力改善服务，并不是激怒政府，故排除C；根据第四段第三句“Poor foreigners with little English hire expediters to navigate the ticket-fighting process...”可知，那些几乎不懂英语的可怜的外国人雇佣服务加速者来应对交通违章罚单申辩，而不是D项中的帮助贫穷的外国人回家。