In 1938, at the government-convened National Health Conference, organized labor emerged as a major proponent of legislationto guarantee universal health care in the United States. The American Medical Association, representing physicians' interests, argued for preserving physicians' free-market prerogatives. Labor activists countered these arguments by insisting that health care was a fundamental right that should be guaranteed by government programs.
The labor activists' position represented a departure from the voluntarist view held until 1935 by leaders of the American Federation of labor (AFL), a leading affiliation of labor unions; the voluntarist view stressed workers' right to freedom from government intrusions into their lives and represented national health insurance as a threat to workers' privacy. AFL president Samuel Gompers, presuming to speak for all workers, had positioned the AFL as a leading opponent of the proposals for national health insurance that were advocated beginning in 1915 by the American Association for Labor Legislation (AALL), an organization dedicated to the study and reform of labor laws. Gompers' opposition to national health insurance was partly principled, arising from the premise that governments under capitalism invariably served employers', not workers', interests. Gompers feared the probing of government bureaucrats into workers' lives, as well as the possibility that government-mandated health insurance, financed in part by employers, could permit companies to require employee medical examinations that might be used to discharge disabled workers.
Yet the AFL's voluntarism had accommodated certain exceptions: the AFL had supported government intervention on behalf of injured workers and child laborers. AFL officials drew the line at national health insurance, however, partly out of concern for their own power. The fact that AFL outsiders such as the AALL had taken the most prominent advocacy roles antagonized Gompers. That this reform threatened union- sponsored benefit programs championed by Gompers made national health insurance even more objectionable.
Indeed, the AFL leadership did face serious organizational divisions. Many unionists, recognizing that union-run health programs covered only a small fraction of union members and that unions represented only a fraction of the nation's workforce, worked to enact compulsory health insurance in their state legislatures. This activism and the views underlying it came to prevail in the United States labor movement and in 1935 the AFL unequivocally reversed its position on health legislation.
Which of the following best describes the function of the sentence in highlight text?
It elaborates a point about why the AFL advocated a voluntarist approach to health insurance.
It identifies issues on which the AFL took a view opposed to that of the AALL.
It introduces evidence that appears to be inconsistent with the voluntarist view held by AFL leaders.
It suggests that a view described in the previous sentence is based on faulty evidence.
It indicates why a contradiction described in the previous paragraph has been overlooked by historians.
此讲解的内容由AI生成,还未经人工审阅,仅供参考。
正确答案是 C。
C 选项适用于这个句子,因为这个句子引出了与 AFL 领导者持有的自愿观点相矛盾的证据。上一段文字提到了 AFL 领导者持有的自愿观点,即工人应该有权利不受政府干涉他们的生活,并将全国健康保险视为对工人隐私的威胁。但是,这个句子介绍了证据,表明 AFL 的领导者拒绝国家健康保险也是有原因的。例如,Gompers 担心政府官僚的监督可能会对工人产生影响,以及由雇主部分负担的政府强制健康保险可能会被用来解雇残疾工人。