OD
I totally agree about "unintended consequences". It is the job of lawyers to parse the exact words used in any bill and try to squeeze out meanings different from the intended ones. However, that consideration alone is not enough to oppose the IA. If it were, Congress might as well pack up and go home.
Your other point, which includes a reference to aminn.org, is much harder to address. It seems to me you agree with my basic thrust that the type of litigation IDCC has been engaged in, and is likely to pursue in the future, is not significantly impacted by the IA. And that is really all I am trying to set out.
LA