Progressives often support diversity mandates as a path to equality and a way to level the playing field. 31/35.But all too often such policies are an insincere form of virtue-signaling that benefits only the most privileged and does little to help average people.
A pair of bills sponsored by Massachusetts state Senator Jason Lewis and House Speaker Pro Tempore Patricia Haddad, to ensure "gender parity" on boards and commissions, provide a case in point.
Haddad and Lewis are concerned that more than half the state-government boards are less than 40 percent female. In order to ensure that elite women have more such opportunities, they have proposed imposing government quotas. If the bills become law, state boards and commissions will be required to set aside 50 percent of board seats for women by 2022.
The bills are similar to a measure recently adopted in California, which last year became the first state to require gender quotas for private companies. In signing the measure, California Governor Jerry Brown admitted that the law, which expressly
32. classifies people on the basis of sex, is probably unconstitutional.
The US Supreme Court frowns on sex-based classifications unless they are designed to address an "important" policy interest, Because the California law applies to all boards, even where there is no history of prior discrimination, courts are likely
to rule that the law violates the constitutional guarantee of "equal protection".
33.But are such government mandates even necessary? Female participation on corporate boards may not currently mirror the percentage of women in the general population, but so what?
The number of women on corporate boards has been steadily increasing without government interference. According to a study by Catalyst, between 2010 and 2015 the share of women on the boards of global corporations increased by 54 percent.
34.Requiring companies to make gender the primary qualification for board membership will inevitably lead to less experienced private sector boards. That is exactly what happened when Norway adopted a nationwide corporate gender quota.
Writing in The New Republic, Alice Lee notes that increasing the number of opportunities for board membership without increasing the pool of qualified women to serve on such boards has led to a"golden skirt "phenomenon, where the same elite women scoop up multiple seats on a variety of boards.
Next time somebody pushes corporate quotas as a way to promote gender equity, remember that such policies are largely self-serving measures that make their sponsors feel good but do little to help average women.
31. The author believes that the bills sponsored by Lewis and Haddad wills____
A. help little to reduce gender bias.
B. pose a threat to the state government.
C. raise women's position in politics.
D. greatly broaden career options.
32. Which of the following is true of the California measure?
A. It has irritated private business owners.
B. It is welcomed by the Supreme Court,
C. It may go against the Constitution.
D. It will settle the prior controversies.
33. The author mentions the study by Catalyst to illustrate____
A. the harm from arbitrary board decision.
B. the importance of constitutional guaratees.
C. the pressure on women in global corporations.
D. the needlessness of government interventions.
34. Norway's adoption of a nationwide corporate gender quota has led to____
A. the underestimation of elite women's role.
B. the objection to female participation on boards.
C. the entry of unqualified candidates into the board.
D. the growing tension between labor and management.
35. Which of the following can be inferred from the text?
A. Women's need in employment should be considered.
B. Feasibility should be a prime concern in policymaking.
C. Everyone should try hard to promote social justice.
D. Major social issues should be the focus of legislation.
答案：ACDCB
进步人士通常支持将多元化任务作为实现平等的途径和公平竞争的方式。但这种政策往往是一种不真诚的美德信号，只会让最有特权的人受益，对普通人几乎没有帮助。
由马萨诸塞州参议员Jason Lewis和众议院临时议长Patricia Haddad发起的旨在确保董事会和委员会的“性别平等”的一对法案提供了一个很好的例子。
Haddad和Lewis担心，超过一半的州政府董事会女性比例不到 40%。为了确保精英女性有更多这样的机会，她们提出了政府配额。如果这些法案成为法律，到 2022 年，州议会和委员会将需要为女性留出 50% 的董事会席位。
这些法案类似于加州最近通过的一项措施，加州去年成为第一个要求私营公司性别配额的州。在签署该措施时，加利福尼亚州州长杰里·布朗承认该法律明确表示
根据性别对人进行分类，可能是违宪的。
美国最高法院不赞成基于性别的分类，除非它们旨在解决“重要”的政策利益，因为加州法律适用于所有董事会，即使在以前没有歧视历史的情况下，法院也很可能
裁定法律违反了“平等保护”的宪法保障。
但这样的政府授权是否必要？女性在公司董事会中的参与目前可能无法反映女性在一般人群中的比例，但那又怎样？
在没有政府干预的情况下，公司董事会中的女性人数一直在稳步增加。根据 Catalyst 的一项研究，2010 年至 2015 年间，全球公司董事会中女性的比例增加了 54%。
要求公司将性别作为董事会成员的主要资格，将不可避免地导致私营部门董事会经验不足。这正是挪威采用全国性企业性别配额时发生的情况。
Alice Lee 在The New Republic)中撰文指出，在不增加在此类董事会任职的合格女性人数的情况下，增加董事会成员机会的数量导致了“金裙”现象，同样的精英女性在董事会中占据多个席位各种板子。
下次有人推动企业配额作为促进性别平等的一种方式时，请记住，此类政策在很大程度上是自私的措施，让其赞助商感觉良好，但对普通女性几乎没有帮助。
31. 提交人认为，由 Lewis 和 Haddad 发起的法案将____
A. 对减少性别偏见几乎没有帮助。
B. 对州政府构成威胁。
C. 提高妇女在政治中的地位。
D. 大大拓宽了职业选择。
32. 下列哪项适用于加州措施？
A. 它激怒了私人企业主。
B. 受到最高法院的欢迎，
C. 可能违反宪法。
D. 它将解决先前的争议。
33. 作者提到 Catalyst 的研究来说明____
A. 任意董事会决定的危害。
B. 宪法保障的重要性。
C. 全球企业中女性面临的压力。
D. 政府干预的不必要性。
34. 挪威在全国范围内采用企业性别配额导致____
A. 对精英女性角色的低估。
B. 反对女性参与董事会。
C. 不合格候选人进入董事会。
D. 劳资关系日益紧张。
35.从课文中可以推断出以下哪项？
A. 应考虑妇女在就业方面的需要。
B. 可行性应该是决策的首要考虑。
C. 每个人都应该努力促进社会正义。
D.重大社会问题应成为立法重点。
以上是阅读题各个问题的答案所对应的句子及全文翻译，祝各位考生都能考上心仪的学校
