Understanding the ACA Arguments
edlind at dickinson.edu
Wed Mar 21 12:18:22 PDT 2012
So let me see if I understand the argument about Congress revoking the
Emergency Medical Treatment Act. Imagine a gravely injured victim of a
car accident is brought to an emergency room. The health care
professional on call that evening determines that this person is not in
the system. So the nurse or physician leaves the accident victim to die
on the sidewalk outside the hospital. That's what we should prefer as
On 3/21/2012 2:52 PM, Rick Duncan wrote:
> You do not need an individual mandate to deal with the free rider problem.
> You could provide that anyone who does not sign on to Obamacare by a
> date certain will not be eligible for protection against pre-existing
> conditions if he tries to sign up later on down the road.
> This regulates actual health insurance activity, rather than
> regulating non-action in the present based upon the prediction of
> action in the future. Also, Congress could provide that hospitals are
> not required to provide free care to anyone who is not in the system.
> Prof. Rick Duncan (Nebraska Law)
> See my recent paper on The Tea Party, federalism, and liberty at:
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Douglas E. Edlin
Department of Political Science
P.O. Box 1773
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Conlawprof