The fifth largest city in the US passed a significant soda tax proposal that will levy (征税) 1.5 cents per liquid ounce on distributors.
Philadelphia’s new measure was approved by a 13 to 4 city council vote. It sets a new bar for similar initiatives across the county. It is proof that taxes on sugary drinks can win substantial support outside super-liberal areas. Until now, the only city to successfully pass and implement a soda tax was Berkeley, California, in 2014.
The tax will apply to regular and diet sodas, as well as other drinks with added sugar, such as Gatorade and iced teas. It’s expected to raise $410 million over the next five years, most of which will go toward funding a universal pre-kindergarten program for the city.
While the city council vote was met with applause inside the council room, opponents to the measure, including soda lobbyists made sharp criticisms and a promise to challenge the tax in court.
“The tax passed today unfairly singles out beverages—including low-and no-calorie choices,” said Lauren Kane, spokeswoman for the American Beverage Association. “But most importantly, it is against the law. So we will side with the majority of the people of Philadelphia who oppose this tax and take legal action to stop it.”
An industry backed anti-tax campaign has spent at least $4 million on advertisements. The ads criticized the measure, characterizing it as a “grocery tax.”
Public health groups applauded the approved tax as a step toward fixing certain lasting health issues that plague Americans. “The move to recapture a small part of the profits from an industry that pushes a product that contributes to diabetes, obesity and heart disease in poorer communities in order to reinvest in those communities will sure be inspirational to many other places,” said Jim Krieger, executive director of Healthy Food America. “Indeed, we are already hearing from some of them. It’s not just Berkeley’ anymore.”
Similar measures in California’s Albany, Oakland, San Francisco and Colorado’s Boulder are becoming hot-button issues. Health advocacy groups have hinted that even more might be coming.
1. What does the passage say about the newly-approved soda tax in Philadelphia?
2. What will the opponents probably do to respond to the soda tax proposal?
3. What did the industry-backed anti-tax campaign do about the soda tax proposal?
4. What did public health groups think the soda tax would do?
5. What do we learn about similar measures concerning the soda tax in some other cities?
问题1选项
A.It will change the lifestyle of many consumers.
B.It may encourage other US cities to follow suit.
C.It will cut soda consumption among low-income communities.
D.It may influence the marketing strategies of the soda business.
问题2选项
A.Bargain with the city council.
B.Refuse to pay additional tax.
C.Take legal action against it.
D.Try to win public support.
问题3选项
A.It tried to arouse hostile feelings among consumers.
B.It tried to win grocers’ support against the measure.
C.It kept sending letters of protest to the media.
D.It criticized the measure through advertising.
问题4选项
A.Alert people to the risk of sugar-induced diseases.
B.Help people to fix certain long-time health issues.
C.Add to the fund for their research on diseases.
D.Benefit low-income people across the country.
问题5选项
A.They are becoming rather sensitive issues.
B.They are spreading panic in the soda industry.
C.They are reducing the incidence of sugar-induced diseases.
D.They are taking away lot of profit from the soda industry.
第1题:B
第2题:C
第3题:D
第4题:B
第5题:A
第1题:
推理判断题。题干意思是“关于费城新批准的汽水税,文章说了些什么?”。第二段前三句指出Philadelphia’s new measure was approved by a 13 to 4 city council vote. It sets a new bar for similar initiatives across the county. It is proof that taxes on sugary drinks can win substantial support outside super-liberal areas.(费城市议会以13票对4票通过了这项新法案,它为全县的类似举措设定了新的标准,这证明对含糖饮料征税可以在超自由地区之外赢得大量支持),可知,费城新批准的汽水税得到了其他地区的大量支持,那么可以推断这项新措施可能会鼓励其他城市效仿,故B项“它可能会鼓励美国其他城市效仿”符合题意。A项“它将改变许多消费者的生活方式”和C项“它将减少低收入社区的苏打水消费”文章没有提到;D项“它可能会影响汽水公司的营销策略”,由第四段opponents to the measure, including soda lobbyists made sharp criticisms and a promise to challenge the tax in court.(但这项措施的反对者,包括苏打水公司的游说者,提出了尖锐的批评,并承诺将在法庭上挑战这项税收)可知文章只提到汽水公司对这项措施的批评,没有提到它影响了汽水公司的营销策略。因此,该题选择B项正确。
第2题:
细节事实题。题干意思是“反对者对汽水税的建议可能会做些什么呢?”。第四段提到了反对者对这项措施提出了尖锐的批评,接着第五段最后一句讲到So we will side with the majority of the people of Philadelphia who oppose this tax and take legal action to stop it.(因此,我们将站在费城大多数人的一边,反对这种税收,并采取法律行动阻止它)可知,C项“采取法律行动”正确。A项“与市议会讨价还价”和B项“拒绝缴纳附加税”文章没有提到;D项“努力赢得公众支持”虽然是其中一个方法,但是采取法律措施才是反对汽水税的最有效办法。因此,该题选择C项正确。
第3题:
细节事实题。题干意思是“行业支持的反征税运动对汽水税提案做了什么?”。第六段第一句指出An industry backed anti-tax campaign has spent at least $4 million on advertisements. The ads criticized the measure, characterizing it as a “grocery tax.”(一个支持反税收运动的行业已经在广告上花费了至少400万美元;这些广告批评了这项措施,称其为“杂货税”),由此可知,反征税运动对汽水税提案通过广告进行批评,故D项“通过广告批评该措施”正确。A项“它试图激起消费者的敌意”和C项“它不断向媒体发送抗议信”文章中没有提及相关信息;B项“它试图赢得杂货商的支持来反对这项措施”,文中只是说反征税的行业批评其汽水税就是杂货税,但这和杂货商没什么关系。因此,该题选择D项正确。
第4题:
细节事实题。题干意思是“公共健康组织认为汽水税能起到什么作用?”。第七段第一句指出Public health groups applauded the approved tax as a step toward fixing certain lasting health issues that plague Americans.(公共卫生组织对这项获批的税收表示欢迎,认为这是朝着解决困扰美国人的某些长期健康问题迈出的一步)可知B项“帮助人们解决某些长期的健康问题”符合题意。A项“提醒人们注意由糖引起的疾病的风险”文章未提及;文章第三段提到most of which will go toward funding a universal pre-kindergarten program for the city(其中大部分将用于资助该市的一个普及学前教育项目),可知C项“为他们的疾病研究增加基金”错误;D项“惠及全国低收入人群”,文章只提到汽水税可以从汽水行业中夺回一小部分利润,而这些行业为了在这些社区再投资,向较贫困社区推广一种导致糖尿病、肥胖和心脏病的产品,并没有提到汽水税能惠及全国低收入人群。因此,该题选择B项正确。
第5题:
细节推理题。题干意思是“关于其他一些城市对汽水税采取的类似措施我们了解到什么?”。文章最后一段提到Similar measures in California’s Albany, Oakland, San Francisco and Colorado’s Boulder are becoming hot-button issues.(类似的措施在加州的奥尔巴尼,奥克兰,旧金山和科罗拉多州的博尔德已经成为热点问题),可推断,汽水税在其他城市是一个敏感的热门话题,故A项“它们正成为相当敏感的问题”正确。B项“它们在汽水行业中散布恐慌”和D项“它们从汽水工业中拿走了很多利润”文章都没有提到,且与文意不符;C项“它们减少了由糖引起的疾病的发病率”,文中提到的是长期健康问题,C项表述不准确。因此,该题选择A项正确。