MBA考试

【单选题】Democrats on the Senate JudiciaryCommittee vented their fury over high gasoline prices at executives of the nation’s five largest oil companies on Wednesday, grilling the oilmen over their multimillion-dollar pay packages and warning them thatCongress was intent on taking action that could include a new tax on so-called windfall profits. Such showdowns between lawmakers and oil titans have become a familiar routine onCapitol Hill.But with gas prices nearing $ 4 a gallon, and lawmakers headed home for a weeklong MemorialDay recess where they expect to get an earful from angry constituents, there is added urgency forCongress to appear active.
But while momentum is building for several measures, including a bill that would allow the Organization of the PetroleumExportingCountries to be sued inAmerican courts under antitrust laws, there is little sign that any of the proposals would do much, if anything, to lower prices quickly.And the oil executives warned that government intervention might only make things worse. Instead, they called onCongress to allow more drilling and exploration for domestic oil.
The increasing urgency to seem aggressive about gasoline prices was apparent on Tuesday when the House voted by an overwhelming 324 to 84 to approve the bill, commonly referred to as NOPEC, which classifies OPEC、as a monopoly in violation of the ShermanAntitrustAct. SenateDemocrats have included that measure as part of a package of legislation intended to address the high price of gasoline, along with the tax on windfall profits and a measure to tamp down speculation in the oil futures market that many lawmakers think is contributing to the run-up in prices.
At the JudiciaryCommittee hearing,Democratic senators struggled to have the executives explain how oil prices had risen so high. The senators expressed doubt that basic laws of supply and demand were at work and suggested instead a more sinister combination of monopolistic behavior by oil-producing countries, speculation in the futures markets and sheer corporate greeD、
On Monday, PresidentBush signed a bill temporarily suspending the purchase of crude oil for the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Mr.Bush had initially opposed such action but relented after the House and Senate approved the bill by wide margins. Senator Richard J.Durbin,Democrat of Illinois and a strong supporter of SenatorBaraek Obama’s presidential bid, made a particularly pointed attack, in which he seemed to warn the oil executives that they would soon no longer have such a good friend in the White House. He also suggested that Mr.Bush should be doing more to press the oil companies to help lower prices at the pump, while acknowledging that it would be difficult to pass a windfall profits tax while Mr.Bush was still in office.
SenateDemocrats were angry with the oilmen because______.
[A] they get tax-free pay packages
[B]Congress took on actions but in vain
[C] the showdowns were merely a routine
[D] oil prices had risen so high
网考网参考答案：D
网考网解析：
[考点] 事实细节 [解析] 此题考查对文章中相关细节的理解。问题问的是民主党议员对石油行业不满的原因，根据题干信息“Senate Democrats”，我们可以定位至首段首句Democrats...vented their fury over high gasoline prices at executives of...oil companies...，grilling the oilmen...，句中的Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee对应题干中的Senate Democrats；vent their fury对应着are angry with；executives of...oil companies对应着题干中的oil men。这些细节都是同义转述。该句中vent one’s fury over something at somebody的结构表示“因为某事对某人不满”或“因为某事生某人的气”。本题所问的原因，正好在over high gasoline prices的片断中做出回答，是D选项oil prices had risen so high的同义转述，因此D选项正确。 [干扰项分析] A选项错误，该项内容从属于首段首句伴随状语grilling...and warning them that...这个分词短语，是民主党议员不满时警告的内容，而不是不满的原因。B选项所述的“国会采取行动”也是警告的内容，而且该选项后半部分提及的“但是无效”(but in vain)是无中生有的内容。C选项是对国会摊派的评价，不是不满的原因，该选项属于与问题无关的选项。 document.getElementById("warp").style.display="none"; document.getElementById("content").style.display="block"; 查看试题解析出处>>