An excellent comment by a Republican commentator (yes, really)

[madinmaryland]

"By law, emergency care cannot be withheld," this commentator wrote. "Why pay for something you can get free? Of course, while it may be free for them, everyone else ends up paying the bill, either in higher insurance premiums or taxes."

He added: "Some of my libertarian friends balk at what looks like an individual mandate. But remember, someone has to pay for the health care that must, by law, be provided: Either the individual pays or the taxpayers pay. A free ride on government is not libertarian."

Who is this commentator??

The writer was Mitt Romney. The former Massachusetts governor is now trying to insist that the health plan with a mandate that he championed in his state -- with the support of a legislator named Scott Brown -- is oh-so-different from the bill President Obama signed this week. But Romney can't take back his own words.

Thank you to E.J. Dionne for pointing out this little gem from Romney.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/24/AR2010032402429.html

[Mass]

1. Actually, I would prefer healthcare to be paid by taxes, so that everybody contributes

according to their ability, not their need.

However, thanks for point out that the reform that was just enacted not that long ago would have been voted by moderate Republican.

[Frances]

2. I can't believe that Mitt Romney made the same argument

I've been making. People who use the ER for free should pay something for that care. If we can't get a public option through Congress and we can't, then a mandate is the best way.

[kestrel91316]

3. Under the mandate lots of people who couldn't afford any insurance or healthcare at all

are going to have insurance with affordable premiums due to the subsidy. They will not be burdening the ER with nonemergencies anymore.

I know. I am one who will benefit (though I have never gone to the ER for anything but a REAL emergency - as a medical professional I know the difference - and I always paid).

[subterranean]

5. Actually we did get a public option through Congress.

Unfortunately, it was removed in the Senate.
But even with a public option, we would still have the individual mandate.

[Uncle Joe]

4. It should be the tax payer that pays, that's what the Constitution implies at least twice.

"To promote the general welfare," and the greatest, most effective way to hold true to that oath is universal non-profit coverage for every American.

Any thing short of that leaves the Congress as not representing the best interests of the American People, if you had a strong national public option, that could at least be a stepping stone to the former, but mandated purchasing; alone, from a redundant for profit "health" insurance industry; having nothing to do with actual health care will not get you there.

In fact, it can only work against the general welfare as it creates an adverse dynamic; an enforced cash flow loop sending a portion of the People's precious dollars back to the Congress through the for profit "health" insurance industry in the form of bribery/lobbying money that will only serve to strengthen this particular industry's grip on "We the People's" government and in turn over the people.

This a forced, back-door non-representative tax which serves the interests of the for profit "health" insurance industry and against those of the people.

Thanks for the thread, madinmaryland.