http://www.wsav.com/midatlantic/sav/news.apx.-content-articles-SAV-2006-12-07-0011.html
This article basically says someone who needs constant dialysis but is here illegally may not be able to get us to pay for it any more, absent an emergency. Her husband says it isn't fair because they come to work 'not to take advantage', but regular dialysis is hardly cheap and one doubts their taxes cover it. They are thinking of moving to a different state that doesn't have such an 'unfair' law. If the law is passed nationwide, we are cautioned, they will have no choice but to go back across the border.
So are we supposed to think the law making this change is bad, or effective, and a really good idea? The author seems to think we will think the law is bad, given that they may end up having to go back across the border.
I don't see it that way.
What do you think?
2006-12-08
15:26:41
·
16 answers
·
asked by
DAR
7