2003年Text 3
In recent years, railroads have been combining with each other, merging into supersystems, causing heightened concerns about monopoly. As recently as 1995, the top four railroads accounted for under 70 percent of the total ton-miles moved by rails. Next year, after a series of mergers is completed, just four railroads will control well over 90 percent of all the freight moved by major rail carriers.
Supporters of the new super systems argue that these mergers will allow for substantial cost reductions and better coordinated service. Any threat of monopoly, they argue, is removed by fierce competition from trucks. But many shippers complain that for heavy bulk commodities traveling long distances, such as coal, chemicals, and grain, trucking is too costly and the railroads therefore have them by the throat.
The vast consolidation within the rail industry means that most shippers are served by only one rail company. Railroads typically charge such "captive" shippers 20 to 30 percent more than they do when another railroad is competing for the business. Shippers who feel they are being overcharged have the right to appeal to the federal government's Surface Transportation Board for rate relief, but the process is expensive, time consuming, and will work only in truly extreme cases.
Railroads justify rate discrimination against captive shippers on the grounds that in the long run it reduces everyone's cost. If railroads charged all customers the same average rate, they argue, shippers who have the option of switching to trucks or other forms of transportation would do so, leaving remaining customers to shoulder the cost of keeping up the line. It's theory to which many economists subscribe, but in practice it often leaves railroads in the position of determining which companies will flourish and which will fail. "Do we really want railroads to be the arbiters of who wins and who loses in the marketplace?" asks Martin Bercovici, a Washington lawyer who frequently represents shipper.
Many captive shippers also worry they will soon be his with a round of huge rate increases. The railroad industry as a whole, despite its brightening fortuning fortunes. still does not earn enough to cover the cost of the capital it must invest to keep up with its surging traffic. Yet railroads continue to borrow billions to acquire one another, with Wall Street cheering them on. Consider the .2 billion bid by Norfolk Southern and CSX to acquire Conrail this year. Conrail's net railway operating income in 1996 was just million, less than half of the carrying costs of the transaction. Who's going to pay for the rest of the bill? Many captive shippers fear that they will, as Norfolk Southern and CSX increase their grip on the market.
54.The word "arbiters"(line 7,paragraph 4)most probably refers to those
[A] who work as coordinators.
[B] who function as judges.
[C] who supervise transactions.
[D] who determine the price.
[答案] B
[解題思路]
本題的對(duì)應(yīng)信息為第四段的最后一句話""Do we really want railroads to be the arbiters of who wins and who loses in the marketplace?" asks Martin Bercovici, a Washington lawyer who frequently represents shipper"（"我們是否真的想讓鐵路公司成為在市場(chǎng)上決定誰敗誰榮的裁決者呢？"馬丁·貝科維奇問道，他是一位常常代表鐵路客戶的華盛頓律師）。其中可以看出arbiter的功能在于決定who wins and who loses，自然就是一個(gè)類似于法官的裁判角色，因此B為正確答案。實(shí)際上arbiter這個(gè)詞的意思是"仲裁者"。A選項(xiàng)的意思是"協(xié)調(diào)員"，這種人不能起到?jīng)Q定輸贏的作用，只進(jìn)行協(xié)調(diào)，因而是錯(cuò)誤選型。而C、D選項(xiàng)"交易監(jiān)督員"和"價(jià)格決定者"更是與原句無關(guān)，可以排除。
[題目譯文]
"arbiters"（第四段第七行）這個(gè)詞的意思可能指那些 。
[A] 做協(xié)調(diào)工作的人
[B] 起法官作用的人
[C] 監(jiān)督交易的人
[D] 決定價(jià)格的人
【推薦】考研英語歷年真題來源報(bào)刊閱讀理解100篇匯總
品讀名著，教你學(xué)考研英語寫作高分技巧專題
考生必看：背誦100句涵蓋所有考研英語單詞
