<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A good decision</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.medrants.com/archives/2046/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2046</link>
	<description>Internal medicine, American health care, and especially medical education</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 15:15:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Equal Justice Under Law</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2046/comment-page-1#comment-4414</link>
		<dc:creator>Equal Justice Under Law</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:50:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/08/14/a-good-decision/#comment-4414</guid>
		<description>&gt; The courst still have some
&gt; sense, some of the time.

Show some respect for the judicial system. If legislators wouldn&#039;t write laws that were mutually contradictory, so-called &quot;activist judges&quot; (so-called by whomever disagrees with their interpretation of contradictory laws) wouldn&#039;t have to resolve the contradictions. In this case, the AAMC, the NRMP, and friends secured passage of a special amendment that resolved the anti-trust question by codifying the legitamcy of the Match. There was no room for interpretation, and so the judge decided accordingly. You want absolute clarity from the judicial branch? Demand better legal writing from the legislative branch. It might help if elected officials and their staff started authoring the legislation themselves rather than leaving all the writing to lobbyists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> The courst still have some<br />
> sense, some of the time.</p>
<p>Show some respect for the judicial system. If legislators wouldn&#8217;t write laws that were mutually contradictory, so-called &#8220;activist judges&#8221; (so-called by whomever disagrees with their interpretation of contradictory laws) wouldn&#8217;t have to resolve the contradictions. In this case, the AAMC, the NRMP, and friends secured passage of a special amendment that resolved the anti-trust question by codifying the legitamcy of the Match. There was no room for interpretation, and so the judge decided accordingly. You want absolute clarity from the judicial branch? Demand better legal writing from the legislative branch. It might help if elected officials and their staff started authoring the legislation themselves rather than leaving all the writing to lobbyists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2046/comment-page-1#comment-4408</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Aug 2004 04:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/08/14/a-good-decision/#comment-4408</guid>
		<description>Thank god for the decision. The courst still have some sense, some of the time.

I am disgusted that because of the millions these idiots cost  NRMP to defend this frivolous rubbish, FUTURE students going through the match will have to pay higher fees. As if they didn&#039;t have enough debt already.

I wish we followed the UK system, where the loser pays the costs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank god for the decision. The courst still have some sense, some of the time.</p>
<p>I am disgusted that because of the millions these idiots cost  NRMP to defend this frivolous rubbish, FUTURE students going through the match will have to pay higher fees. As if they didn&#8217;t have enough debt already.</p>
<p>I wish we followed the UK system, where the loser pays the costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2046/comment-page-1#comment-4406</link>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/08/14/a-good-decision/#comment-4406</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t understand what an alternative to the Match system would be.  Are they suggesting an application system much like that of medical school?  I don&#039;t think many med students would want to go through that hell again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t understand what an alternative to the Match system would be.  Are they suggesting an application system much like that of medical school?  I don&#8217;t think many med students would want to go through that hell again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

