I blog about free markets in medical care and transparent pricing.
I told someone the other day after Judge Robert’s ruling that I guess Al Qaeda hates us now because we used to be free. The guy with me said, “You had better get used to it. It’s the law!”
“What do you mean ‘it’s the law’,” I asked.
“It’s the law of the land,” he said.
“You mean the law of the land for some,” I said. ”The law doesn’t even apply to over 1000 businesses that obtained waivers.”
He said something about me being unreasonable and that was that. I haven’t heard anyone talk about this as a reason for the unconstitutionality of the Unaffordable Care Act (UCA). Aren’t the laws supposed to apply equally to everyone? This seems like reason enough to give Roberts all he needed. Oh well, here’s another thought.
Will jobs migrate to the businesses (over 1200) that obtained waivers? What’s the lesson if this happens?! You don’t think any money changed hands here, do you? Seriously, how can anyone at this point believe that the UCA was about anything other than selling influence?
G. Keith Smith, M.D.