Unit 16
On climbing-frames in the smarter neighbourhoods of Los Angeles, white kids occasionally shout to each other in Spanish. They learn their first words from Mexican nannies who are often working illegally, just like the maids who scrub floors and the gardeners who cut their lawns, which helps to explain why fixing America’s broken immigration system is proving so difficult. Californians, no less than the residents of other states, find illegal immigration distasteful. Yet they depend on immigrants for even such intimate tasks as bringing up their children.
This week the Senate was trying again to reconcile these contradictory impulses. It seemed close to the promise of legalisation for the nation’s roughly 12m illegals, some 2.5m of them in California alone. But their cases will not be considered until the border is deemed to have been made more secure and the current stockpile of legal immigrants is cleared—something that will take at least eight years. Worse, from the immigrants’ point of view, they will probably have to leave the country and then petition to return, in what is known as “touch-back”.
If it becomes law, the Senate bill will transform America’s immigration system. Following the lead of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Britain, America would adopt a points system that will give priority to the sort of young, employable immigrants who are most likely to contribute to the economy. Family ties, essential in deciding immigration claims since the 1960s, would become less important.
Immigrant advocates have become more militant. Last year huge, mostly orderly crowds gathered on the streets of Los Angeles, Chicago and other cities to protest against a bill, passed by the House of Representatives, that would have criminalised illegal immigrants. Many carried American flags. Rallies earlier this month, by contrast, were dominated by professional protesters. In Los Angeles a small and occasionally angry crowd clashed with police. Protesters have called for another rally next month in Hollywood.
Although the pressure for reform appears overwhelming, it is not clear that a deal can be done this year. Compromise may prove more elusive in the House of Representatives. Because of the way that congressional districts are drawn, many politicians represent constituencies with large numbers of ethnic minorities or hardly any at all.
Nor is it clear that the Senate plan would bring illegal immigrants out of the shadows. Those who have American children（up to 40% of those in California) will be reluctant to “touch-back”. Much will also depend on how many visas are made available to unskilled workers. If there are too few, the supply of immigrant labour will surely continue to meet the demand for it, regardless of what the law says.
注（1）：本文选自Economist；
注（2）：本文习题命题模仿对象为2002年真题Text 4。
1. From the first paragraph we learn that _______.
A) Californians seldom hire illegal foreign workers unless they get work permits
B) Californian citizens’ attitude towards immigrant workers remains ambivalent
C) it is difficult for immigrants to find a job in California due to the hostility from the locals
D) parents hire Mexican nannies for their kids so that they can learn Spanish at an early age
2. Which of the following statements is NOT true according to the text?
A) There is a possibility that illegal immigrants in America can finally receive legal status.
B) The American immigration policy will be modified to emphasize different factors, other than family bond, of immigration decision.
C) The problem of illegal immigrants will be solved in the near future.
D) Family connection will become not that important in the immigration to U.S.
3. According to the text, _______ will be most likely to be allowed to immigrate to America.
A) those Mexican workers
B) those with college education
C) those who marry American citizens
D) those who are hardworking
4. Which of the following best defines the word “militant” （Line 1, Paragraph 4）?
A) violent
B) carrying guns
C) loving wars
D) frequent
5. What does the last sentence of the last paragraph mean?
A) If there are not enough visas, a lot of people have to “touch-back”.
B) If there are enough visas, every currently illegal immigrant will be legalized.
C) Illegal immigrants who have American children are more easily to receive visas.
D) If there are not enough visas, there will still be a lot of illegal immigrants.
篇章剖析
本文主要讨论了美国的非法移民问题。第一段提出了一个矛盾的现象，尽管美国人并不是那么欢迎非法移民，但是他们生活中的方方面面却离不开非法移民的工作。第二、三段谈到了美国参议院最近对于非法移民问题的讨论和可能出台的政策措施，以及其中的困难。第四段谈到了非法移民在美国开始自己的维权活动。第五段继续讲述通过新法案的困难。第六段进一步分析即使新政策能够出台，仍然会存在问题。
词汇注释
scrub /skrʌb/ v. 擦洗，擦净
reconcile /ˈrekənsaɪl/ vt. 使和解，使和谐
impulse /ˈɪmpʌls/ n. 推动，刺激
legalisation /ˌlɪɡəlaɪˈzeɪʃən/ n. 合法化
stockpile /ˈstɒkpaɪl/ n. 积蓄，库存
petition /pɪˈtɪʃən/ v. 请求，恳求，请愿
priority /praɪˈɒrɪti/ n. 优先，优先权
advocate /ˈædvəkɪt/ n. 提倡者，鼓吹者
clash /klæʃ/ v. 猛撞，冲突
elusive /ɪˈljuːsɪv/ adj. 难懂的，难捉摸的
constituency /kənˈstɪtjʊənsi/ n. （选区的）选民
ethnic /ˈeθnɪk/ adj. 人种的，种族的
难句突破
But their cases will not be considered until the border is deemed to have been made more secure and the current stockpile of legal immigrants is cleared—something that will take at least eight years.
主体句式：But their cases will not be considered until...
结构分析：破折号前的这个长句主要说明了非法移民问题会被考虑的两个必要条件，这两个条件之间用and来连接。破折号之后的内容是对两个条件的补充说明。
句子译文：但是在国界变得更加安全以及现有的合法移民问题充分解决之前——这得花掉差不多8年时间，非法移民的问题是不会被考虑的。
题目分析
1. B 推理题。文章第一段倒数第二句中提到加州有很多移民，而加州人并不是非常喜欢这么多的移民，同时，第一段最后一句指出很多工作却不得不依赖移民来完成，因此加州人对待移民的态度是矛盾的。A选项的错误原因在于人们实际上雇用了很多非法移民，C选项的错误原因在于加州人并不敌视移民，而且文中没有提到移民找工作的难度。D选项的错误原因在于孩子们学会西班牙语是雇用墨西哥保姆的结果，而不是原因。
2. C 细节题。考生在文章第二、三段中可以找到A、B、D选项所有细节。特别需要指出的是A选项说明移民获得合法身份具有可能性，但是还没有进入具体计划和实施的阶段。至于C选项，第二段中提到非法移民问题的解决依然是遥遥无期，并不是在近期就可以解决的，因此C选项不符合题意。
3. B 细节题。注意该题的题干为将来时，是指以后会发生的事情。文章第三段中提到，美国将改变移民制度，以后将优先考虑那些年轻、能够工作的移民，因此对于他们来说有过大学教育的外国移民是更加受欢迎的，也更容易移居美国，而婚姻因素在将来相对来说是次要的因素。
4. A 语义题。文章第四段中讲述了移民的抗议活动越来越积极、越来越职业化，而且有时还与警察发生冲突。可见现在的趋势是变得越来越激烈。B和C选项与该词的本义有关，但是没有考虑到上下文的具体意思。
5. D 语义题。文章最后一句的意思是，如果没有足够的签证，那么不管法律怎么规定，对移民劳动力的需求一定会继续促使移民非法移居美国。也就是说，由于美国对于移民劳动力的需求非常大，如果签证不够的话，还是会有很多人以非法移民的身份来美国工作。
参考译文
在洛杉矶一些舒适的社区游戏器械上，白人孩子们偶尔会用西班牙语彼此叫嚷。他们从墨西哥保姆那里学到了他们最早的词汇，那些保姆通常都是非法工人，就像擦地板的女仆和整理草坪的园丁们一样。这就可以解释为什么完善美国千疮百孔的移民制度如此困难。加州人也和其他各个州的人一样，觉得非法移民并不令人愉快。但是他们却格外依赖移民，甚至包括像抚育孩子这样亲密的任务。
本周参议院正重新试图解决这个棘手的问题。现在看起来这个国家中约1200万的非法移民很有希望合法化，其中在加州就有250万非法人口。但是在国界变得更加安全以及现有的合法移民问题充分解决之前——这得花掉差不多8年时间，非法移民的问题是不会被考虑的。更糟的是，从移民们的观点来看，他们有可能必须先离开这个国家，然后再申请回来，这就是所谓的“touch-back”。
如果成为法律，那么参议院的这一法案将改变美国的移民制度。美国将学习加拿大、澳大利亚、新西兰和英国的方法，采用一个积分制度，并优先考虑那些年轻且能够工作的移民，因为他们更有可能对经济做出贡献。家庭关系自从20世纪60年代以来对于移民申请极为重要，但在将来会变得不那么重要。
移民支持者现在的行动越来越激烈。去年许多移民有组织地到洛杉矶、芝加哥以及其他城市的大街上游行反对众议院通过将非法移民犯罪化的法案。他们中的许多人都拿着美国国旗。而这个月早先时候集结的游行队伍则是由职业抗议者们领导的。在洛杉矶，一小部分偶尔愤怒的人们与警察发生冲突。现在抗议者们正在号召下个月在好莱坞举行另一次集会。
尽管改革的压力非常大，但是目前不清楚法案是否能够在今年通过。妥协在众议院也许会被证明是更加难以实现的。国会分区的方式使得很多政治家代表了很大数目的少数民族或者根本不代表任何少数民族。
参议院的计划是否能够使得非法移民走出阴影仍然是一个疑问。许多人的孩子都是美国公民（其中40%在加州），他们都不会愿意“touch-back”。计划能使多少非法移民合法化也取决于多少签证能够发放给没有特殊技能的工人。如果签证太少，那么不管法律规定了什么，对移民劳动力的需求一定会继续促使移民非法移居美国。
