Progressives often support diversity mandates as a path to equality and a way to level the playing field. 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 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”.

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.

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 feelgood but do little to help average women.

1.The author believes that the bills sponsored by Lewis and Haddad will _________.

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

解析：选A。A 观点态度题。本题考查作者对两项麻州法案的看法，可定位至第二、三段，发现两项法案意在确保各委员会中的“性别平等”（即：减少性别偏见）。而两项法案为对首段第二句作者观点“此类政策往往是一种虚伪的道德信号，仅有利于最有特权者，却无益于普通人”的例证。可见作者认为，法案并不能如发起人所言减少性别偏见，A正确。

2.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.

解析：选C。C 细节理解题。由题干关键词the California measure定位至第四、五段。第四段第二句指出，州长承认加州措施很可能违宪。第五段指出最高法院可能裁定它违反“平等保护”这一宪法保障。因此C正确。

3.The author mentions the study by Catalyst to illustrate _________.

A the harm from arbitrary board decision

B the importance of constitutional guarantees

C the pressure on women in global corporations

D the needlessness of government interventions

解析：选D。D细节理解题。根据题干关键词the study by Catalyst定位至第七段。该段第一句提出：没有政府干预，企业董事会中的女性人数也一直在持续增加（即政府干预并不必要）。第二句指出研究发现：跨国公司女董事人数于2010至2015年间显著增长。联系两句可知，第二句是在以数据论证第一句观点，D正确。

4.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

解析：选C。C 细节理解题。由题干关键词Norway’s adoption of a nationwide corporate gender quota定位至第八段。 第八段第一句指出，强制实行性别配额制会导致私企董事会阅历不足，即：使得不合格的候选人加入董事会，第二句则指出这恰恰是挪威在全国范围内实行董事会性别配额制已导致的后果，C正确。

5.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.

解析：选B。B 推理判断题。文章开篇三段提出观点：多样性指令等政策对促进公平无济于事，反而会强化特权。第四至九段指出此类政策的不可行：可能被判违宪；不但没有必要，甚至很可能带来多种不良后果。末段重申此类政策的无效性。可见，本文重在指出此类政策不可行，建议政策制定者考量其可行性，B正确。注：feasibility意为“可行性”，包括决策实施起来是否有效，是否具有副作用。