I’ve noted in the past that the problem with state health care reform acts mandating health insurance is that they don’t tackle the issue that is deterring employers from providing broader health insurance benefits, namely the ever increasing and rapidly escalating cost of health insurance. In response, Massachusetts lawyer David Harlow argues on his blog
ERISA preemption "Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act"
Someone Else’s Thoughts On Preemption and the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act
By Stephen Rosenberg on
People with thin skins – or who can’t laugh at themselves – shouldn’t write blogs. I got a good chuckle out of this over my morning coffee this morning.
The Lessons of the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act’s $400 Million Shortfall
By Stephen Rosenberg on
There’s a lot to be said about the preemption issues raised by state health insurance mandates and the assumptions that underlie the beliefs of those who argue that ERISA preemption should not be allowed to prevent states from experimenting with acts intended to remedy the problem of the uninsured. Articles like this one here,…