One of the major elements of the new healthcare bill worrying conservatives and ‘limited government’ voters alike is the bill’s mandate requiring U.S citizens to purchase health insurance. Whether this mandate is constitutional or not is a matter being debated by a handful of state attorney generals nationwide. Some, including Virginia’s attorney general, Kenneth Cuccinelli, are planning to sue the federal government, arguing that Congress lacks the proper authority to require U.S. citizens to purchase health insurance under the new bill. This “primer” is not intended to discuss this debate. Instead, it is intended to introduce one of the primary economic principles underlying the compulsory health plan mandate itself. This principle is called “adverse selection”. Once the concept of adverse selection has been explained, it should become clear that the Congressional mandate is probably necessary to bring about an efficient, cost-effective healthcare system – one that does not see insurance premiums skyrocket, which closes off coverage to all but those who are wealthy enough to afford these plans.

With the unanimous support of members of congress, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been exploring the possibility of enacting regulations to control business and consumer activity on the internet. Naturally, this has brought widespread support – along with criticism – from vested interests and casual observers alike. Supporters feel that unjust business practices have gone unregulated on the internet for too long, while those who are opposed to regulation argue that rules enacted by a central authority may stifle innovation and hurt economic growth.

Aid is raised quickly – and the amount is much larger – thanks to networking and messaging technologies like Facebook and Twitter.