<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<oembed>
	<version>1.0</version>
	<type>link</type>
	<objectid>89686</objectid>
	<title><![CDATA[Coverage v. Coercion]]></title>
	<url>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/einer-elhauge/coverage-v-coercion_b_89686.html</url>
	<abstract><![CDATA[<p>Suppose you were choosing between two employers. Both offer the same Blue Cross insurance to employees who pay 25% of premiums. But one employer says, "Choose us. We provide more universal coverage because we make our employees take the insurance even when they don't think it is worth the 25% contribution." Does this argument sound persuasive? Sure doesn't to me. I'd say both firms are offering the same coverage, with one adding a heaping dosage of coercion that doesn't really...</p>]]></abstract>
	<taxonomy><![CDATA[Politics]]></taxonomy>
	<date_published>2008-03-03T18:54:00-05:00</date_published>
</oembed>
