Submitted by Mark A. Hurt, MD, Feb 5, 2008 22:16

I fail to see how "Forcing a share of these costs onto the uninsured would be a move toward equity, and toward individual responsibility rather than collective responsibility. It would be, in other words, a step forward."

Government coercion is already at play with the Medicare and Medicaid laws that are in place. Adding even more coercion to the equation is simply an additional violation of the principle of individual rights (including property rights). Such rights require individual choice, choice that the government makes impossible by any action it takes in its attempts to "provide" any types of goods and services, much less medical services.

So, how is the cause of individual choice advanced by coercing the uninsured? It isn't.

The only reasonable alternative to this is to deregulate the medical profession, privatize Medicare and Medicaid, and allow physicians tax breaks to treat the poor, uninsured, and underinsured. At least, then, a simple payment of "thank you" from poverty stricken patients will have real meaning, as it did once.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.