Written by David Starr   

The squawking from the Tea Party about not wanting "socialized medicine" quickly brings up the absurd and blatant contradiction that Tea Partiers themselves receive it in the form of Medicare. But another contradiction that is less known is Reagan Care, in the form of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA).

In 1986, EMTALA was passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by the former U.S. president, Ronald Reagan, an icon of the right. Although Reagan spoke against "socialized medicine" in his earlier years, EMTALA was his crowning contradiction for health care.

EMTALA requires hospitals to provide emergency medical treatment to anyone regardless of status; including illegal immigrants. After all, health care is a fundamental right. To make up for the cost, hospitals are paid by the Department of Health and Human Services under the Medicare program. It also has stopped "hospital dumping," i.e., no treatment because of inability to pay or transferring patients to other hospitals to avoid expensive treatment.

Obama care does go further to regulate the health insurance industry. For example, according to "Obama Care Facts, dispelling the myths," it would get rid of pre-existing conditions and gender discrimination prevalent in the insurance industry, not being denied health coverage based on health status, not being dropped from health coverage because you are sick, and not placing lifetime limits on coverage. There is subsidized health insurance, but only those who are 400% under the poverty level qualify. (Why not at the poverty level and/or above it?)

With Obama care's individual mandate-one has to buy health insurance or pay a penalty-people could find themselves more between a rock and a hard place considering increasing costs, profiteering and forking out money regardless if one has insurance or not.

But isn't Obama care and Reagan care really the same, ideologically? The health industry still has major influence to maximize profits and increasing costs over health care.

Meanwhile, Tea Partiers are indeed caught in another contradiction. But would they believe that the "Gipper" actually practiced "socialized medicine"? If by some chance they do, they are going to need "emergency treatment" to recover from the shock. David Starr writes on social, political and other issues.