Also, the author might want to work on hiding his leftie-elitist worldview (e.g. "For very good reasons, medical, scientific, and scholarly journals are intended to be read by those in the communities they serve, not the general public."), or at least putting up one of those pine-tree air fresheners to hide its stench.
Steve-o: the author is not exactly a leftie elitist. He's actually quite conservative. I guess part of his conservatism includes protecting private property from the government.
Remember, these journals don't receive the federal money, the researchers do. If a scientist writes an article about their federally-funded research project, and if a peer-reviewed journal pays to review and edit and publish and distribute and archive it, why should the journal have to give away the rights to the stuff they paid for?
Suppose you ran a grocery store and some of the produce you spent money to obtain and make available for a price came from farmers receiving federal subsidies from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. How would you feel, as a grocer, having to give away the produce you paid to obtain and make available simply because the producer was on the government dole?
Perhaps some of y'all were out sick the day they taught "Free Markets and Keeping Government Out of Them," in Conservatism 101.