Tort Reform Can Lower Costs Without Harming Health Care. So Why Isn’t It in Obama’s Plan?
The latest Federal Election Commission data (released 7/13/09) reports that President Obama received the most cash of any candidate from lawyers or law firms — more than $43 million. He received almost three times more from them than Hillary Clinton ($15 million) and more than four times the amount John McCain received ($9.9 million). President Obama received almost 50 percent of all dollars from the legal industry, and two-thirds of all legal industry dollars went to Democrats Obama and Clinton.
So which is it — fairness or campaign dollars? It’s difficult to present any logical reason Obama would not include tort reform in his health care planning, yet it is quite easy to fathom $43,071,129 financial reasons.
The Democratic Party’s attack on the insurance industry is taking the public’s eye off a larger culprit — the party and the president’s relationship with the legal profession.
President Obama is right. Capping malpractice awards would hurt those who have suffered from neglect while shielding the negligent. A much better approach would be legal reform. The U.S. is the only advanced country in the world that allows lay jurors to judge scientific and techical testimony. The problem is exacerbated by allowing lawyers to pack juries with sympathetic jurors chosen by jury consultants.
Dont let the ‘libtards’ and the LYING MSM allow the LYING Obamanation and his Socialist/Communist clique to lead the American economy to destruction. Just look at this and be afraid be very afraid.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Physicians consciously or unconsciously order millions of “unnecessary” tests for fear of litigation. Wouldn’t you, if your profession carried the constant threat of being sued (for real or imaginary reasons), where if you lose, you could lose your honor, your profession, your retirement, and even your home?
It used to be good clinical judgment was the key to being a good doctor. But lawyers know clinical judgment is subjective, and can be disputed in court with an “expert” witness who reaches an opposite, yet equally valid, conclusion. So clinical judgement has been replaced by expensive tests, as physicians search to find an objective piece of data to back up their diagnosis. Tolerance for error is zero. Physicians must have perfect foresight. If they don’t, a lawyer with perfect hindsight will judge them.
Besides ordering extra tests, physicians have increased their referrals, either to a specialist, or to an already crowded Emergency Room. It’s a way to offset the burden of responsibility with others in the field, but ultimately increases overall health care costs.
There are also patients who demand a certain level of care, even if medically unwarranted. Society expects a physician to practice what is considered standard of care. But it’s the individual’s expectations that must be met in order to avoid a lawsuit. Unmet expectations (for valid or invalid reasons) mean an upset patient. And it only takes one upset patient to start a lawsuit.
The prescription for a healthier America is very simple: exercise more, eat less, drink less, and quit smoking. Many people ignore this as they find it easier to expect the doctor to cure years of bad habits with a pill. So long as some patients behave like consumers, expecting 100% satisfaction or your money back, physicians will continue to behave in a risk-averse manner, ordering tests or consulting a specialist to confirm what they already knew. Not to satisfy their clinical judgment, but that of these patients and the lawyers standing behind them.
The Chicago White House Thugs are now offering protection in exchange for what?
Maybe billions in potical kickbacks?
I agree-
follow the money and keep an eye out for Obamathugs off shore bank accounts.
Pass the popcorn!
-and watch out for those Death Panels.
Every man is the architect of his own fortune.
Wow, who would have thought that Obama’s health care reform was not about reform nor healthcare but really a socialist power grab? Shocking! Kill the Bill!! No negotiations no compromises!
Tort reform has broad support outside of the staged town halls and though it would be unpopular, not half as unpopular as what ObamaCare will do to older Americans.
It seems like there is a “political commercial” to be made, a variation of “Can you hear me now?” using ordinary Americans asking questions at the town halls across the country. But, we’re not really having a dialogue about this at all. Good ideas, like tort reform, are not even considered. No, our President is busy defending “end of life” counselors and telling people to take a pain pill instead of getting a pacemaker.
TO: Sammy Benoit
RE: Why Not?
Because his ‘Plan’, I mean the Big Plan, is not about helping America. It’s about destroying it. That’s the REAL ‘Plan’.
I’ve met a number of people who keep shaking their head about all the actions of this ‘president’ since he came into office. They think he’s either ‘crazy’ or ‘stupid’.
Looking at it using a more rational and discriminating approach, i.e., Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) techniques, I see a pattern of behavior with a certain commonality. That is everything he has done, with the backing of the Democrat-controlled Congress, has been for the detriment of the rest of US.
This health care program is just another example. And a far more deadly one, considering what I’ve read in HR 3200 vis-a-vis the Advance Care Planning Consultation section in pages 424-430. With this, government bureaucrats can write ‘orders’ on what sort of care people can and CANNOT receive.
I had occasion, yesterday, to talk to another one of these confused people. I’d explained my thoughts on this ‘president’ to him some time before when he initially expressed his confusion on any rational explanation to the president’s and Congress’ behavior since January 2009.
Yesterday, he finally conceded that the explanation that DOES make sense IS mine. If he looks at it from THAT perspective, EVERYTHING these people have done falls into a pattern that is….unfortunately for US….understandable.
Hope that helps….
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth is coming out.....for people who can wrap their minds about its ugly nature.....]
After reading one paragraph of the 1000+ page Healthcare bill, it was obvious that it was really a jobs bill for lawyers.
TO: All
RE: Additional Evidence….
….supporting my earlier comment about the BIG ‘Plan’.
Health Care Tort reform would be EASY to achieve.
So would Health Care Insurance reform.
But NEITHER of these are addressed in the monstrosity of HR 3200.
So WHY IS THAT?
The only explanation is that the president and Democrat-controlled Congress DON’T WANT to improve heath care. They want to CONTROL it. And in that control, we have the ‘death pill’ of the Advance Care Planning Consultation, pages 424 through 430 of HR 3200.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. By the way….
…..if HR 3200 passes. Health Care Tort reform WILL be achieved.
How?
Because you can’t sue the federal government. And all doctors and hospitals will be paid BY the federal government. Therefore, they are de facto employees of the federal government.
I’m confident some lawyer could make that claim stick in a federal court. Otherwise, all to many of the hospitals and doctors will collapse under the burden.
Hey, SAMMY! Congrats on the PJM byline..!
The cost of lawsuits against doctors is about 2% of the cost of health care; the remainder of the cost of our tort liability system is attributable to so-called “defensive medicine,” doctors performing tests and procedures that are only designed to protect themselves. Tort reform, however, is usually pitched in the form of “caps” or limits on the amount of damages someone who is harmed by a doctor or hospital can recover. This does nothing to attack the defensive medical practice and puts the burden of reform on those who have been harmed the most. If a doctor caused you or your loved one to go blind or put you in a wheel chair for life, would you be satisfied with $200,000 in compensation (a figure that is in some of the tort reform measures)? Unfortunately, there are a significant number of people injured each year by medical errors. It is not an improvement in health care to limit the compensation of those who are harmed the most.
Look at it this way: If you negligently drive your car and hit a doctor, he or she can recover unlimited damages. But, under tort reform, if a doctor negligently screws up your medical care, you can only recover a limited amount. Is that your idea of justice?
We should learn from our legal brethren. A modest proposal: Medical fees should be structured on the contingency model enjoyed by tort attorneys. That is, If I, in my professional capacity as a medical doctor successfully intervene and prolong the life of a ‘client’, I should receive 33% of the projected earnings of said individual based on current and anticipated earnings and estimated additional productive years. If I fail, and the ‘health care consumer’ expires, no charge. Modifying factors such as seriousness of illness, pain relief, ‘quality of life’. ability to return to work, etc, etc, would all be factored in. The ambulance chasers are on to a good thing.
What about tort reform that doesn’t cap damages but just eliminates subjective assessments like “pain and suffering” and punitive damages (let some other agency handle punishment, where appopriate)–if someone’s ability to practice their livelihood has been seriously impaired, or they will incur future health costs due to the malpractice, they should certainly be fully compensated for that.
“first, we kill all the lawyers.” everything else should take care of itself.
I said Heath Care Reform-
Sorry..
It is now officially Heath Insurance Reform.
With 1000 pages how the hell you expect me to keep up?
I am not against recovery of damages: actual damage done and the cost to set it right should be a part of a settlement as it was the promised outcome via the contract for that service. If you are permanently disabled for life, then you do, indeed, have reason to be supported by those that injured you most likely via their insurer. That said pain and suffering awards are purely subjective and liable for abuse in our system. Any pain or suffering that needs treatment is treated and rolled into the expense of the award, that which is mental and can be demonstrated to have a direct cause from the injury is also covered. The rest of dealing with it is up to you – you have suffered a misfortune in life and no amount of money will ever set it right. The object of the malpractice suit is to get the problems of the physician on record and hold that physician accountable for their practice of medicine.
This is why a number of doctors are now looking towards contractual agreements where the individual understands that medicine is a practice, an art not an exacting science, and will sign off on non-malpractice contracts with that physician. Suing is a breach of contract, at that point and gains its own lawsuit in return. This puts the onus of deciding your treatment and who to treat you upon you… where it should always be. You walk into any treatment knowing that it is an art, not a science, and that it is called a ‘practice’ for a reason. When you agree to treatment from such physicians, you have your eyes wide open.
The problem of any medical system is doctors leaving the system when the overhead and expenses get too high. Increasing the bureaucracy and amount of time that must be spent to deal with it, plus the defensive medicine, plus the higher cost of insurance due to high payouts then creates a non-suit space in which those physicians will take NO insurance and require YOU to think about your health on your own behalf and stop handing it over to the doctor and payment over to an insurance company. Removing the liberty to leave the system then discourages individuals who do not want to be cogs in a machine but practice medicine to the best of their ability… they walk or don’t enter medicine as they don’t want to be bureaucrats and beholden to them, but to have a relationship with their patients for the best care that can be provided. The system is broken, but expanding the concepts that mad it that way and deepening them will not ‘fix’ it, but make it worse. The fastest way to stop your headache is to stop pounding your head with a 2×4… yet we are now looking at the 4×8 as the solution…
Cap awards at 4x’s the victims annual salary.
Obama received 43 MILLION in campaign contributions from lawyers/law firms.
Obama not considering tort reform.
A President willing to let millions of Americans stand in line for health care to pad the pockets of his political cronies.
The question is: How many other groups/unions/thugs does Obama have left to pay off and to what depths will he sink to to pay those debts?
What needs to be capped is what a lawyer receives from a judgement. Cap that at a reasonable rate per hour worked and the snakes like Edwards will writher back into their nets.
Better yet socialise the legal industry.
Nice post. As to the question in this post, John Dingell explained exactly this at a townhall near Detroit meeting 2 weeks ago: http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2009/08/video-us-rep-john-dingell-gets-booed-at.html (also here: http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2009/08/video-us-representative-john-dingell-in.html)
@ 12 “If a doctor caused you or your loved one to go blind or put you in a wheel chair for life, would you be satisfied with $200,000 in compensation (a figure that is in some of the tort reform measures)? ”
Malpractice claims break down into two portions:
A) Compensation for tangible, economic losses.
B) Compensation for intangible losses, e.g. “pain and suffering.”
As I understand it, most tort reform laws do not limit A, only B (usually at $250,000). So in theory, if a famous pianist had his fingers cut off by a negligent doctor, he could sue for millions in lost earnings, regardless of tort reform.
Lawyers don’t like tort reform because they know they have to make a logical argument to justify claims under part A, whereas for part B, they simply have to appeal to the jury’s emotions to extract ever higher, limitless awards.
How could you put a dollar cost to psychological/emotional trauma? Yet that is precisely what lawyers do, in an ever increasing bidding war, in awards designed less to compensate a patient’s trauma, and more to line the lawyer’s pockets (they, who’ve suffered not a whit, are oh so willing in every case to take the 33% they rightfully deserve). Ask yourself this: if patient compensations had no limit, but we were to cap lawyer reimbursement, say at $150,000 per case, do you really think they’d be so eager to keep raising the amounts awarded?
Consider the net effect to society: though an individual may gain millions, the rest of society suffers when it has to pay for more tests, more referrals, or simply do without certain doctor specialties (e.g. OB/GYN, neurosurgery), as doctors in these fields decide to retire or limit their pratices to “safer” procedures.
Some mechanism must always exist to compensate patients for medical negligence. But a system whereby the sky’s the limit on compensation will eventually leave all of society with higher medical costs and fewer doctors.
Genghis:
So you’re for federal regulation of the legal industry?
The fear of a frivolous lawsuit haunts far too many businesses and individuals, but is especially prevelant in the healthcare industry. Ambulance-chasers such as John Edwards are a perfect example of what’s gone wrong with the system; pick a jury that knows very little about medicine, overly-dramatize a real tale of suffering, twist the truth just enough to make the jury suspicious of the motives of the doctor and voila! You produce a multimillion dollar award, of which you get thirty-three percent. Multiply this scenario by a few thousand each year and you have the main reason for skyrocketing health care costs.
Don’t for a moment expect your elected representatives to include any measure of tort reform in the current health care bill. The overwhelming majority of them are lawyers. They, their livelihood and the legal industry itself are more important to them than the deleterious effects of unnecessary lawsuits are to America. The only way to guarantee tort reform is to stop voting lawyers into office.
Could someone please explain why we’re hearing a mountain of discussion regarding the details of the Health Care Bill and nothing of the unconstitutionality of it all?? Discussing the details implies agreement with the idea of a government run system.
Please take note, the intention of our fearless leaders is that this massive bill be rejected by the proletariat, but once having been whittled down to something less intrusive, and subsequently accepted, it still accomplishes the goal of government getting its foot in the door of controlling our health care, and afterward, our lives.
The argument should be for government to stay out of the private sector in all respects. We need to stand on only one principal in this fight and that is saying “HELL NO” to the unconstitutional meddling of government in all aspects of our lives. Our freedom is at stake here boys and girls!
I love this clip. Glenn Beck worshiping American health care as the best in the world, compared to Glenn Beck last year complaining about the dangerously bad American health care system last year. Really, these characters delight in making you people look like dumb, swallow-just-about-anything, hypocrites.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2mhpqCPpuE
Re: #13 Genghis
“We should learn from our legal brethren. A modest proposal: Medical fees should be structured on the contingency model enjoyed by tort attorneys. That is, If I, in my professional capacity as a medical doctor successfully intervene and prolong the life of a ‘client’, I should receive 33% of the projected earnings of said individual based on current and anticipated earnings and estimated additional productive years….”
What would you consider the “projected earnings” of my 78 year old, retired, father-in-law?
Sounds to me like your plan screws the hell out of the elderly.
Everybody loves tort reform… until someone they love is harmed or killed by medical malpractice. Then, not so much.
Tort Reform is not possible as long as the Democrats control Congress & the White House since trial lawyers–like the corrupt unions–buy & sell themselves to the Democratic Party.
However, Congress’s various bills in both the House & Senate are power grabs to take Liberty away from the we the people. None of these bills are workable. Kill the bills. All of them. No compromises.
Why ration those who wholeheartedly support the Democratic party? This is the question the current
occupant of the Oval Office, and his lackies, ask.
Therefore, the answer is no, unless the Democratic Party is perceived to be in metaphysical trouble, which is not the case, and will not be the case as far as those in charge of the Democratic Party at this time are still in charge.
So, will there be a “palace coup”? Right now, I would say the chances are about as slim as the sun rising in the North tomorrow.
If you want to know what makes Obama tick, read up on SAUL ALINSKY, Obama is a student of Alinsky tactics and does them well. Hillary was directly associated with Alinsky.
Obama is not out to help us. He is trying to dismantle us. I think he has a deep dislike of Americans.
Of course doctors do a lot of tests…they have to cta on a daily basis. This is a bad bill. However, tort reform is something that needs to happen seperately. Don’t agree to the bad bill just because they add tort reform. That’s like putting cool whip on a pile of poop.
Tort reform seems pretty easy to me. IF a trained attorney can’t convince a jury of peers that something happened then they have to pay the court costs. I spent seven (7!) years dealing with a bumber I scratched, from behind, that didn’t even bother the 5mph bumper. I would challenge anyone without coaching to be able to pick out the scratch from the photo. (I’ll happily submit it for your review if you’ll leave me a note at the site! Bexar County, Texas Cause No. 2002-CI-03797 Suk Yong Thurston vs. me) I got sued for $250,000 and the insurance company eventually settled for $5,000 because they wanted it to go away. Fortunately, Texas has enacted new laws that prevent this type of thing from extending past three (3!) years now. What a relief!
I wish someone would publish what medical liabibility insurance premiums (for doctors and other health care workers, and hospitals) are as a percent of total medical spending.
I have not once seen this. We need this to know the true scale of the problem, and the potential for savings.
Tort reform has lowered costs and increased access to medical care in Indiana and Texas but dont let that get into the “debate” as it will likely be considered more mis-information.
Bob, my (limited) understanding of tort reform caps is that they are caps on “soft” damages like pain and suffering or merely punitive damages. Actual damages would still be uncapped, but by their natures they don’t usually get too crazy huge.
Moho… I’ve read your comment #26 several times and see no reference to the topic at hand which is tort reform. I’m sure that Glenn Beck (Sarah Palin cannot be far behind of course) make for great fodder on the liberal sites where actual information is discouraged, here we’re discussing tort reform. Why not join us or at the very least if you’d rather talk about Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin head over to the HuffPo where they would rather talk about average citizens than the officials they elected?
Tort reform is a must!
Why are lawyers entitled to a single penny of a settlement? Remove that incentive. If I have a medical injury, I hire a lawyer for whole lot of dollars per hour and that’s it — he’s very well compensated – just like the lawyer I pay to write a will, incorporate a business, etc. If the award is to me for an injury, why does the lawyer get a large percentage of that? We’re putting caps on CEO pay, why not on lawyers in tort cases? There’s absolutely no accountability for lawyers.
The argument is not “reform or no reform”.
Reform is needed, but a complete takeover of the American Healthcare system by the government(this will be the end result)is not the answer. Instead let us focus on what is broken and fix it.
We are not perfect, but I truly believe in my heart that we are a great nation…the greatest in the world. Simply take a look at the census data to find that the US ranks #1 in immigration to the nation as well as #1 in the fewest citizens leaving the nation. That says something about this great nation we live in.
My parents and grandparents came here from Cuba 48 yrs ago and believe this is the greatest nation in the world…a nation of free choices, freedom of speech, capitalism and free enterprise.
Yet lately we seem to be moving further away from these principals that make our country different from the rest. Let us not completely rid ourselves of the principals our forefathers founded this nation upon. Let us not limit our choices.
Since when can we trust our government to do anything correctly?? (No matter what Party is in control)
Let’s make the US a better country, not a different country, because a complete transformation of the US as we know it can be the biggest mistake of our lives.
Tort reform is not in the package for the same reasons that unions have partial ownership of GM, that off-set carbon credits are up for bid, the stimulus package was not for “shovel ready projects”, etc. . . The administration is using our money to reward his contributors with invented crisis campaign-legislation. The downside to that tact is that the policies are making real, but partial, problems worse. Watch the deficit, inflation, unemployment,taxes, the balance of trade, and manufactoring move into unchartered waters of possible no return. Your friendly trial lawyer stands to make 30% plus billable hours for as long as the crisis lasts.
It might be reasonable to put a minimum and maximum amount on a recovery as they do with sentencing a criminal, to avoid unreasonable judgments that end up on appeal being usually lowered. The maximum could be high enough to discourage sloppy care while alleviating some of the ‘risk’ a doctor takes when practicing medicine. I understand an ‘accident’ implies that the intention of the doctor was to do no harm, unless it could be proved otherwise through a ‘pattern’ or other evidence to the contrary.
Another idea might be special judges who oversee medical malpractice cases. The might be able to ‘judge’ the cases better if they are familiar with the medical field.
Some people think tort reform might hinder the medical industry from enacting practices that have avoided more malpractice suits, such as counting sponges after surgery to make sure nothing was left in the body.
I found a breakdown of where our health insurance dollar goes http://www.ahip.org/content/default.aspx?docid=25127, but can’t find a breakdown of where the medical malpractice insurance dollar goes. I will keep looking.
Would this tort reform trump states law? I am reading that in places such as Florida a physician can go ‘bare’ meaning he/she can practice without liability insurance. I also read where if a physician works for the government he/she does not pay insurance, a hospital will carry insurance for the hospital and it’s employees, and doctor groups can pool their money and buy a group policy.
One of the reason why I think people are so angry is because this is another thing that takes a lot of time to understand and digest. Many people are very busy with conducting their own lives and obligations and do not trust the government, the medical industry or the insurance industry to have their interest in mind.
These people have good reason to be angry and cautious. Obama and his cronies and the majority Democrats are making a big mistake treating these citizens as if they have no reason to question their methods and motives.
TO: AThinkingPerson
RE: Moho
That’s because he’s attempting to confound the discussion.
Typical Bolshevik approach.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out....]
Poor physicians? thats like saying…poor athletes and poor ex congressman or military intelligence isn’t it? its an oxymoron….
Wow, Obama recieved 4 times as much money from lawyers than McCain? Amazing, oh wait I remember Obama raised 4 times as much as McCain overall. An oh yeah hes an attorney himself and was a law professor. Also most lawyers are democrats. Now its making sense. What doesn’t make sense is how this blogger (do not read journalist) comes to his conclusions. Please give us some facts and figures about how much “compensation” is court awarded in the context of overall medical costs. This argument is so flimsy way to blame the victim conservatives. Always against attorneys but always having to use them.
js,along with a lot of you are so hypicritical and you can’t even see it. “Free market for healthcare” but not for lawyers? How do you guys settle those things in your mixed up minds?
While campaigning in 2004, President Bush chose to ignore the health care crisis, as all Republican politicians consistently do, except in one key area: medical malpractice. He painted a dark picture:
Runaway juries giving away hundred million dollar awards to undeserving plaintiffs!
Doctors retiring by the thousands under the weight of malpractice insurance!
Defensive medicine—doctors, fearing lawsuits, running every possible test and procedure—bankrupting the system!
His solution to this list of medical crimes? Tort “reform,” – capping the amount of damages a plaintiff can win in court.
Many of the reasons listed above for tort reform seem reasonable— that is, until you realize that every one of these claims depends on misinformation.
Juries have given the same award amounts (after adjusting for inflation and medical costs) as they have during the last 40 years. Malpractice premiums have risen because of the insurance boom and bust cycle, and spending on all aspects of malpractice amounts to less than one half of one percent of health care spending.
The only thing tort reform will do is prevent the seriously harmed from receiving adequate compensation, and make it much tougher for injured patients to sue (and with only 3-4% suing, that’s quite an accomplishment).
So who wins big if tort reform passes? The health insurance industry and bad doctors, clearly.
So why is the Republican answer to the health care crisis “tort reform”?
Probably for the same reason the Republican answer to the financial crisis and recession was “you’re all a bunch of whiners” and “let’s just cut taxes and lower the capital gains tax, and everything will be fine”.
Probably for the same reason why the Republican answer to the education crisis is to come up with a fancy new program called “No Child Left Behind” and then proceed to not fund it, so that underpaid teachers have to use their own money to pay for the supplies.
Probably for the same reason that Republican answer to the social security crisis was to urge seniors to throw their life savings into a volatile stock market that was about to crash.
It’s becoming very predictable. Look to where average working Americans are being screwed, and there you’ll find the GOP, phillips head in hand, happily reciting its bogus talking points about how it’s not deregulated private industry that’s ever the problem; it’s those pesky citizens and their lawyers for wanting to hold the industry responsible for malpractice. If we could just eradicate the means for average people to hold private industry accountable, everything would work out just dandy for everyone!
What a joke.
Only tort reform needed: Set up an evidence-based “loser-pays” tort system for medical products and services.
Next problem?
The big secret that nobody seems to know is that TRUE medical malpractice is so rare in this country as to be a nonexistent. When it does happen, it makes the news because it is an event.
I am a physician who used to do obstetrics, not any more. I was very good at it and never had a bad outcome. Despite the stress, it was probably the most enjoyable thing I did in medicine, and a lot of physicians feel that way. But, the insurance premiums, hospital bureaucracy (because of the threat of litigation), and the difficulty getting paid, eventually just added up to the point where it was not worth it. Many good doctors have reached similar conclusions, and the net result is that there are many areas of the country where pregnant women cannot find an obstetrician, period!
If you want to place blame, you need look no further than John Edwards and his ilk. Frankly, I think he should be in prison. These legal charlatans have directly CAUSED the deaths of innocents. There is NO greater crime than to falsely accuse an innocent person of wrongdoing.
Those who think tort reform is the answer to rising health care costs should think again. Here are some statistics on it.
Medical malpractice payouts are less than one percent of total U.S. health care costs. All “losses” (verdicts, settlements, legal fees, etc.) have stayed under one percent for the last 18 years.
Moreover, medical malpractice premiums are less than one percent of total U.S. health care costs as well. Dropping for nearly two decades, malpractice premiums have stayed below one percent of health care costs. Americans for Insurance Reform, “Think Malpractice is Driving Up Health Care Costs? Think Again,” http://www.insurance-reform.org/pr/AIRhealthcosts.pdf
…..if HR 3200 passes. Health Care Tort reform WILL be achieved.
How?
Because you can’t sue the federal government. And all doctors and hospitals will be paid BY the federal government. Therefore, they are de facto employees of the federal government.
I’m confident some lawyer could make that claim stick in a federal court. Otherwise, all to many of the hospitals and doctors will collapse under the burden.
Chucky
I agree with you line of thought but the federal courts are now too far gone to return the constitutional rights to the individual.
The real tragedy of medical malpractice is the tort system in general. Few patients who suffer a medical accident ever receive compensation for their injuries because of the significant costs and time required to adjudicate malpractice cases. The no fault workman’s compensation insurance system would go a long way to resolve these issues. Alternatively, patients could purchase event insurance that would cover medical accidents prior to any medical interventions. Think of it like the insurance that people used to buy before boarding an airplane or no fault auto insurance. The idea is to get the attorneys out of the equation unless a medical accident is an obvious and egregious case of criminal negligence.
I am just an average working stiff but I don’t understand why we can’t open up the health care market to competition to improve cost to the consumer. If there is competition won’t prices go down? Wal-Mart and Home Depot are successful because they have the best price, selection, convenience etc…and attract customers away from other stores. If one doc charges $200 for an office visit and another charges $100, the latter will be a much busier doctor.
Also with our own disregard for our individual health seen in the obesity rate today, shouldn’t some of the responsibility fall on the citizen? Wouldn’t we stop eating at McDonalds every day if you knew you were looking at a $50K+ procedure down the road. If you don’t make a lot of money than you would be forced to live a much healthier lifestyle for financial reasons if nothing else. Why do we always seem to have someone else make decisions for us? Maybe we should govern towards the highest common denomenator instead of the lowest!
homero:
What are you talking about governments (federal, state, local) are sued all the time. Where do you get your facts? Glenn Beck?
Does anyone really think that, in the long run, if the government takes over health care, that patients will continue to have the right to sue at all?
When they start looking for ways to contain costs, that’s going to be one of the first things to go out the window. The idiot trial lawyers are just too blinkered by their leftism to see that.
Pass government health care, and expect to see lawyers in the unemployment line along with everyone else.
51. JT4545:
I am just an average working stiff but I don’t understand why we can’t open up the health care market to competition to improve cost to the consumer. If there is competition won’t prices go down? Wal-Mart and Home Depot are successful because they have the best price, selection, convenience etc…and attract customers away from other stores. If one doc charges $200 for an office visit and another charges $100, the latter will be a much busier doctor.
Also with our own disregard for our individual health seen in the obesity rate today, shouldn’t some of the responsibility fall on the citizen? Wouldn’t we stop eating at McDonalds every day if you knew you were looking at a $50K+ procedure down the road. If you don’t make a lot of money than you would be forced to live a much healthier lifestyle for financial reasons if nothing else. Why do we always seem to have someone else make decisions for us? Maybe we should govern towards the highest common denomenator instead of the lowest!
SOUNDS GREAT …well don’t be fooled, the government is not your friend. when was the last time Pelosi did you anything good for YOU?
FANNY MAE AND FREDDY MAC operate like that. and they with friends like the teabagging (this is teabagging not tea parties) Barney Franks caused the market crash that the entire worlld in now trying to deal with.
MANY of the problems with HEALTH CARE are because of government interference …SO WHY DO YOU THINK THOSE THAT CAUSED THE MESS WILL OR CAN FIX IT ?
the government has no interest in fixing it anyhow. they (the politicians) have 2 purposes 1) get elected …2) get re-elected. EVERYTHING ELSE IS WINDOW DRESSING.
Jack Carlson brings up an important point, one that is usually lost in the discussion. It isn’t as if malpractice is rampant. It just so happens that people who are responsible for lives tend to be responsible and attentive people. For example, there are not a lot of commercial airline crashes due to pilot error. Despite what various liberal groups may argue, police very rarely shoot innocent people in error. Again, despite dramatic headlines, teachers generally do not sleep with their students or abuse them. So we have a great number of fields where people are responsible for lives in one way or another and those people generally (like more than 90% of the time) do not screw up. The same is true of physicians. I don’t know what the actual statistics are (I’m not sure anyone has compiled them), but I would guess that the error rate is very small. The real error can then be decomposed into 3 general categories as I see it: you’re going to get error from interns and residents simply because they are doctors in training. Sure, they are supervised by more experienced physicians who do catch the errors more often than not, but sometimes they can’t catch everything. It’s unfortunate, but, we have to be willing, as a society, to accept a certain degree of error so that we can actually have physicians. The second potential source of error is simply fatigue. Doctors often work too much. But this is an easily correctable problem. It’s already being addressed with many residency programs by caps on the number of hours worked in a week. What most people probably aren’t aware of, doctors spend an inordinate amount of time on paper work. A lot of this is due to the insanity of the current private insurance/socialized medicine (via Medicare/aid) hybrid we have. Remove that (and not by single payer, which means they’ll just have to do government paperwork), and you reduce the total hours worked, reduce a lot of stress, and get better treatment. So then the last source of error is just plain negligence. There are bad doctors out there that make mistakes for no good reason. There aren’t actually enough to make an entire parasitic industry though. And I suspect that the insurance industry is in collusion with the trial lawyers on this front. They both get to bleed doctors. And, of course, the entire thing is fueled by leftist victimology.
In response to Alison: it is actually irrelevant whether or not malpractice is a huge drain on the healthcare system (although it’s not hard to find numbers supporting a conclusion opposite to yours). Lawyers are generally a great bane upon civilization. The vast majority of our elected officials are lawyers and the vast majority of legislation is written in arcane legalese, ripe for litigation. Anything that scales back the influence of lawyers over our lives is generally a good thing for the vast majority of people.
MOHO: The federal government is the legal industry. Look closely.
GCPSTEVE: Under the Obama plan we will have far fewer 78 year olds. Nevertheless, my proposal is still valid. Aged retirees with reduced incomes will still have to pay, but since the fee is based on income, they would be getting a bargain. Or it could be based on tangible assets. First you must accept the fact that medicine is neither a right or a privilege, it is a commodity. Or, since you are obviously a loving son-in-law, perhaps you’ll step up to the plate.
I refer you to Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.
jack carlson:
“There is NO greater crime than to falsely accuse an innocent person of wrongdoing.”
Do you mean like Palin accusing the democrats of creating death panels?
I agree. Palin is scum. And her false accusations are the worst of the worst since she is scaring the daylights out of our seniors.
48. Alison wrote:
Those who think tort reform is the answer to rising health care costs should think again. Here are some statistics on it.
Medical malpractice payouts are less than one percent of total U.S. health care costs.
Peter writes: It’s not the payOUTS that are the big problem, it’s the payINS.
When you add together the cost of medical school tuition loans, liscenses, insurance, equipment, and everything else a typical doctor requires to perform his job adiquately, he/she must already make more than double my base salary just to break even.
Add on top of that the mortgage, car payments, car insurance, and the day to day needs, you have to be making an additional equivalent of my base salary.
Then comes malpractive insurance, which is based on the area of expertise, and can cost for a single year again double what my base salary is or more. So now you’re looking at a doctor needing to earn five times my salary just to break even in the modern world, then take into consideration the free care some give, the reduced medicare/medicade payments the government impose, etc.
By reducing the reasons people can sue, or making it more difficult to sue frivalously, costs will start to come down.
It’s clear to see that the reasoning behind NOT including tort reform is to continue to line the pockets of the trial lawyers at the expense of the paying public. Why Obama continues to tap dance around that fact is beyond reason. If he cared at all about preserving private insurance (does any sane person really believe that anymore?) and lowering costs, tort reform would be a top priority.
If Obama’s bill passes it’s a win/win for him. Yet more campaign thank-you payoffs for his 2012 coffers and total government domination of health care that Pelosi and her fellow pirates can pillage at their discretion.
Funny how Americans always come out with the short stick under a liberal administration.
Gee – the one study that has been made of the potential savings of tort refrom shows that it would save 1/2 of 1%. Not exactly the panacea that the wingnuts would claim. But when do facts get in the way of their opinion
Don’t let the Mcainism get to you, I smell the past lingering. Obama is the future and I love him and voted for him. Democrats fight back, forget the signs, Just use you voices and be very Vocal and show the Repubs that their lying too. I know the facts. Go to the Realty check.com and find out from there. Sarah Pailin Pres? If that happens watches what happens when she takes office, that is total discrimination against Asians, Blacks and Hispanics. I am so glad I voted for Obama. Palin’s health care plan you cant afford. For the sign that read Obama lies, Grandma dies, I had my grandmother die last year in Feburary of 2008. I went through hell. I want to say, what goes around comes around and I am rubber you glue, what you say to me will stick like glue to you for life.
I want to see Democrats go to town halls in Republican states and fire back at them and also tell the truth. Check out the You tube video also of the last eight years. I am so glad someone finally had the courage to throw a show at the last President.
What’s necessary to fix the health care conundrum in this country is a simple three step process:
1. Create federal law allowing (perhaps mandating) the sale of health insurance across state lines. This will create a truly competitive atmosphere without a “public option” at great government expense. Medicare Advantage plans would also be available across state lines.
2. Limit “pain and suffering” lawsuits to a meaningful cap, while putting a limit on genuine costs and expenses of the actual costs plus, perhaps 10% or 15% to cover legal expenses. This would serve two purposes, limiting the use of unneeded and unnecessary tests and procedures, and bringing down the cost of doctor’s liability insurance. This would probably cause a strong reaction from trial lawyers, but they would just have to cope.
3. Get employees out of the business of providing health care insurance to their employees with a change to how people are paid.. Perhaps a one-time raise of whatever it costs the employer to provide the insurance so employees can buy their own health insurance. The federal government must also make the cost of medical care, whether for insurance or for actual expenditures, fully deductible on all income tax returns. This would make health insurance truly transportable as the policy would be owned by the individual or family.
For those supposed 47 million uninsured… those that are truly without means to acquire their own insurance, we could and should absorb into the available entitlements, such SCHIPS and Medicaid. Taxpayers should not provide a free ride for those who are in this country illegally, or those who will not purchase their own insurance even though they have the means. Hospitals should be allowed to use any and all legal means to collect reasonable charges from those deadbeats.
Ah,the great John Edwards appears again exposed once more as the slimeball democrap lawyer he is. . .Tort reform is necessary to limit the ambulance chasers from taking away the incentive for bright young people to go into the medical field. Under oblammo’s healthscare plan we will need more doctors. . shouldn’t we be encouraging people to become doctors,nurses, etc? Who wants to be in the medical field if you have to live in fear of a lawsuit, or paty outrageous malpractice premiums? I see stray dog jharp has appeared as expected, dumped his load and left. . . sad, the sorry example he sets for his boys. They need a real man for a dad,j, not some ball-less wimp.
Why doesn’t the Shadow cite the study from whence he gets his “facts” so all us wing nuts can judge for ourselves?
Always consider the source….
Obama and the democrats are missing the one thing that could have helped them since their election to public office. Unlike Reagan and Bush with some democratic support, when democrats are elected, the dems get virtually no republican support.
And most republicans would not only agree with that, but they also encourage disruption and resort to Anarchy when its time to address such serious issues. Their position is either one of genious or political suicide… and most of my conservative friends tell me.. right now, its their only choice. Interesting.
Without the competition of a public option there is no reason to believe any savings incurred would be passed onto consumers.
Any of you business geniuses care to explain to me why you would lower your prices simply because you found a cheaper way to do things.
Supply and demand are the sole drivers to lower prices (health care premiums). And since demand is pretty steady and inelastic increasing the supply is going to be the driver.
And I’m not talking about adding another for profit monopolist that answers to shareholders. What I mean is a not for profit public plan that answers to the voters.
Democrats have announced what they support, healthcare reform. What do the Republicans support? What do they believe in? Do they really think the current system is the best we can do? Do conservatives even understand the issue? Many yelling townhall attendees don’t even understand that Medicade or the VA hospital are government run. Personally I feel the anger is more over Obama than healthcare reform. If McCain was president laying out an identical plan we wouldn’t see any of this. We get it guys you are against things now tell people what you are for.
jharp: Wow, almost a cogent question. Except that comparing public and private business (in this case insurance plans), it is a case of apples and oranges. It also demonstrates you complete lack of knowledge of business and government.
First, public means that we, through confiscation by taxing, support the public option whether we like it or not; therefore it does not need to make a profit to run. So it will always defeat the private option. And the way your president and his congress has it designed, private insurers would go out of business in several years anyway.
Second, S&D are NOT the only decisions involved in pricing: number of clients, actuarial statistics, services offered,etc also add to the cost. Then there is the administration and employee costs. Since the public option costs us all because of taxation, comparing the two is foolish.
“And since demand is pretty steady and inelastic increasing the supply is going to be the driver.” You don’t realize it but you made the point for private insurers. Increasing the supply of insurers by allowing over state-line policies, will drive down costs.
Allowing private insurance companies to sell their insurance over state lines is what is needed to lower costs. But state and federal regulations prevent this.
My question to you is how will the government cover 350 million people-some not even Americans with the same level of care that private insurers do?
“And I’m not talking about adding another for profit monopolist that answers to shareholders. What I mean is a not for profit public plan that answers to the voters.” The fact that you got this from CAP or Kos reveals something scary about yourself. Like I’ve said before, you are a TOOL!
What good is tort reform added on to a bad bill?
Perhpas we are upset with Obama’s plan because we do not understand what it says, and no one will discuss it in detail. Plus Republicans have had no in put. When they have tried they were basically dismissed by Pelosi.
This bill needs to be discussed fully by Americans, then decide what to do.
Plus I dispise Obama’s condescending attitude.
He is good at stirring up trouble and turning people against each other.
He appears to be trying to replace capitalism with Marxism.
How can a people ever purge itself of unscrupulous lawyers?
A nation must first be moral and just. It is only through cohesive bedrock values ( like those we have recently thrown out in this country ) that metastasized piracy is stemmed, yea even prevented.
Our corporations and their lawyers are killing us while free-lance brigands like Johnathan Edwards pick off stragglers.
Your fellow teabaggers.
“A man who was holding a sign reading “Death to Obama” Wednesday outside a town hall meeting on health care reform in Hagerstown, Md., has been turned over to the Secret Service.
Washington County Sheriff’s Capt. Peter Lazich said the sign also read, “Death to Michelle and her two stupid kids.”
As many have said on blogs and the tee vee, these protests have nothing to do with health care reform, and they never did. They are temper tantrums being thrown by small minded, uneducated, racist white people who are angry about having a black Democrat in the White House.”
http://crooksandliars.com/logan-murphy/secret-service-detains-maryland-prote
There is no real evidence supporting the contention that restricting lawsuits would have that much of an effect on overall health care costs. Aesthetically, though, tort reform through a “Good Samaritan” type of exemption for people engaged in health care, especially doctors, should be enacted. Even the most benign and competent doctors will sometimes make a mistake, and since it is actually physically impossible for any human to avoid ever making a mistake, it’s not only unfair but basically illogical and stupid to crucify someone for doing so, especially if it involves someone with a very low overall error rate in treatments compared to others in his or her field.
jharp: Now see you went off the reservation and demonstrated YOU do not want to take part in adult debate.
Using the word “racist” is equally juvenile anymore. It means you have nothing to say so you attack the messenger and try to dehumanize them. To refute your last post would be simple by asking you to reflect on the all too numerous protests, threats and signs against Pres. Bush. But that means adult debate and you are not capable of such intellectual and creative thought.
I would not put it above the Dems to plant these people anyway. Using you as an example of what the left will do to get their way, paying people to make threats and obscene protests are not above your party’s ethical standards.
52. Seriously:
really ! anyone who thinks they will win a lawsuit against the federal government over a health care issue is niave.
the only possible way would be to challenge the constitutionality of the health care bill in supreme court and given that the supreme court has not wished to rule in obvious cases of unconstitutionality leads me to conclude it will be no different here.
I don’t care about your retoeric “seriously” . I am very much against the marxist principals but I see that you may win. As I recall no one ever sued Stalin, and he did monstrous things.
jharp,
Riiiiiiiiiiight. Just us right wing extremist nut jobs here. Can’t believe you pegged us so easily.
commie putz
Blotto ..don’t feed the troll.
watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.
save yourself the agravation and ignore them
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related
blotto:
“Second, S&D are NOT the only decisions involved in pricing: number of clients, actuarial statistics, services offered,etc also add to the cost. Then there is the administration and employee costs.”
Costs have nothing to do with what you sell your product for. Nothing at all.
And you accuse me of not knowing about business?
““And since demand is pretty steady and inelastic increasing the supply is going to be the driver.” You don’t realize it but you made the point for private insurers. Increasing the supply of insurers by allowing over state-line policies, will drive down costs.”
Nonsense. Adding another monopolist does nothing to address the anti competitive insurance companies.
“My question to you is how will the government cover 350 million people-some not even Americans with the same level of care that private insurers do?”
The same way the rest of the world does it. With public not for profit insurance
“And I’m not talking about adding another for profit monopolist that answers to shareholders. What I mean is a not for profit public plan that answers to the voters.” The fact that you got this from CAP or Kos reveals something scary about yourself. Like I’ve said before, you are a TOOL!
Not. These are my words and my thoughts.
You guys need to understand that insurance companies produce nothing. Insurance is simply the pooling of risks. And any sane insurer does not want to insure unhealthy people. It’s a money loser. And just like Medicare we need to pool the risks of the unhealthiest Americans among all of us with public insurance.
one cannot compromise ones principals and still be principaled.
the democratic party and much (or all) of the republican party has compromised on everything. including the constitution.
with each compromise the people lose something. I believe the tipping point has been passed as evident by the election of a radical and racist president.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related
blotto:
A man who was holding a sign reading “Death to Obama”… …the sign also read, “Death to Michelle and her two stupid kids.”
“I would not put it above the Dems to plant these people anyway.”
A plant. Right.
Put the crack pipe away.
74. George S.:
Blotto ..don’t feed the troll.
watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.
save yourself the agravation and ignore them
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related
“As many have said on blogs and the tee vee, these protests have nothing to do with health care reform, and they never did. They are temper tantrums being thrown by small minded, uneducated, racist white people who are angry about having a black Democrat in the White House.””
jharp, you’re truly a piece of work, only you could interpret a single lunatics actions into race baiting a majority of Americans right to dissent. Your accusing America of being racist but you ignore Obama’s racist rantings in his books, have you even read his books? What we are not happy with are his socialistic ideologically driven decisions. He’s been given a bit of rope and now he’s hanging himself and the Democratic party. 2010 will be a good year for America! 2012 and even better one!
Anonymous ..don’t feed the troll, as you can see he is only putting out the whitehouse talking points (you’d think he could at least change the wording so it wouldn’t be such obvious palgerism.
THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL YOU CAN OR WILL HAVE HIM “SEE THE LIGHT”
watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.
save yourself the agravation and ignore them
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related
JHARP–Buddy! Good to see you again here today. So you still wont talk about Obama receiving large amounts from the slumlord he used to turn tricks for Tony Rezko but here you are on a forum where the topic is how much cash he got from lawyers… I know, I know, he’s your messiah, and I shouldn’t blaspheme, but damn… just the visual of Sweet Little Barry servicing that filthy slumlord…its pretty harsh!
73. blotto: “jharp: Now see you went off the reservation and demonstrated YOU do not want to take part in adult debate.
Using the word “racist” is equally juvenile anymore. It means you have nothing to say so you attack the messenger and try to dehumanize them. “
Oh, I see, so you wingnuts have no problem defending the right to carry a sign that says “death to Obama, Michelle and their kids” (oh, yeah, that clearly is “adult debate”), but as soon as someone confronts you and your movement’s shockingly ignorant opinions and behaviors, suddenly you’re being dehumanized and are a victim of hate speech.
How hypocritical.
“I would not put it above the Dems to plant these people anyway. Using you as an example of what the left will do to get their way, paying people to make threats and obscene protests are not above your party’s ethical standards.”
Funny, that pill-popping comedian Rush Limbaugh said exactly the same thing. No surprise that you would be parroting his bull****. Sorry, but you don’t get to take part in the “adult debate” when all you have to offer is mindless drivel that you lifted from a drug addled radio clown.
Anonymous:
“only you could interpret a single lunatics actions into race baiting a majority of Americans right to dissent.”
You are a fool. A majority of Americans? Really?
I thought it was quite clear the reference was to the ignorant redneck teabaggers(a very small minority) who are doing nothing but shouting down questions and debate at the town halls.
We get it jharp, you don’t have to keep harpin. The lefty lovin media never ignores the slightest indignities that their favorite political party endures in this democracy.
They do though tend to ignore the ‘other’ side.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/12/analysis-press-largely-ignored-incendiary-rhetoric-bush-protest/
I could find more examples but I don’t think your worth the effort or the distraction.
P.S. um…Obama is half white, which makes you a racist since you refuse to recognize that fact.
Now back to the matters at hand. Tort reform should be considered when discussing the high cost of health care in this country. Doctors and other health care workers are citizens of this country also.
The primer is a negligible fraction of
the mass of the powder in a cartridge.
You take comfort in your puny percentage;
I take warning from the majority of doctors
I have asked about the effect of malpractice
fear on them, and on their circle of colleagues.
Sunlight – Unlike the wingnuts, I don’t make things up and sicne you asked the source was the Congressional Budget Office.
Congressional Budget Office in 2004 conceded that the legislation for tort reform, even if it instituted a federal cap, would barely dent health care costs: “Malpractice costs amounted to an estimated $24 billion in 2002, but that figure represents less than 2 percent of overall health care spending. Thus, even a reduction of 25 percent to 30 percent in malpractice costs would lower health care costs by only about 0.4 percent to 0.5 percent [emphasis mine], and the likely effect on health insurance premiums would be comparably small.” They were even reluctant to say that a cap would even make a dent on defensive medicine.”
the democratic party is a criminal enterprise …aka the chicago way
Anonymous ..don’t feed the troll, as you can see he is only putting out the whitehouse talking points (you’d think he could at least change the wording so it wouldn’t be such obvious palgerism.
THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL YOU CAN OR WILL HAVE HIM “SEE THE LIGHT”
watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.
save yourself the agravation and ignore them
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related
“Tort reform should be considered when discussing the high cost of health care in this country.”
Of course it should be. The point is it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
If we completely banned the right to sue we’d save 1%.
And get a lot more carelessness and mangled medical procures.
calj: Nice try. Please cite the day and time that I got the idea from Rush? And I suppose you-in your omnipotence know I listen to him. Wow!
And while you are at it, recall the young girl at the Postsmouth town hall who was “picked” to ask your president a question. A plant. There have been all too many instances of left plants at protests, meetings (SEIU, ACORN, etc).
But to disprove you would be to play into your tactic of getting off topic. I challenge you to pick a topic regarding the Dems health care and we can debate it. Go ahead…make my day, punk!!!
I don’t need him to make a intelligent debate with you or jharp. You succeeded in only making my point: that adult and intellectual conversation is above you lefties because it is you who cannot make creative arguments. Your only chance at debate is to distract, dehumanize and lie.
Blotto ..don’t feed the troll.
watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.
save yourself the agravation and ignore them
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related
89. jharp: “If we completely banned the right to sue we’d save 1%.”
No, the health care industry would save 1%. And how much you want to bet that those savings are not passed on to the consumer?
It’s a bit shocking to see to what depths the GOP will sink, and how easily they’ll betray the American people, just so the health care industry can squeeze that 1% out of us.
It’s really simple, Obama is a lawyer also. None of them will make a move to upset the apple cart.
It should be you can sue anyone you want to, but if you lose you pay for all costs involved.
blotto:
“And while you are at it, recall the young girl at the Postsmouth town hall who was “picked” to ask your president a question. A plant.”
And the evidence to support your claim?
Is it that her Mom voted for Obama that proves she was a plant? Or that her Mom campaigned for Obama?
The only plant here is the plant you have for a brain.
Cal J.:
89. jharp: “If we completely banned the right to sue we’d save 1%.”
No, the health care industry would save 1%. And how much you want to bet that those savings are not passed on to the consumer?
_________________________________________________
Thanks for the correction. You are 100% correct. And there is no doubt the savings would NOT be passed onto consumers. There is no reason to.
And the other benefit of no more lawsuits… … those families who have a family member disfigured, killed, maimed, and crippled by malpractice would get to tough it out on their own.
The costs of defensive medicine are conveniently ignored in the zeal to defend trial lawyers. But troll on, it’s amusing.
It gives them something to do, while waiting on that $15 an hour job to promote Obamacare.
1% of costs?!? BULL! Last data I saw (a few years back), a typical primary physician’s malpractice insurance was almost $50K/yr! A specialist often pays $200k/yr. This is why obstetricians are quitting the field, as #47 jack carlson (an actual doctor) noted above.
That’s just the premium. It does not include paperwork, time, employees and all their attendant time and costs, lawyer consultations even when not being sued, etc…. The costs even reach into the medical schools and increase the costs of getting one’s degree.
I followed the link given above to the Americans for Insurance Reform site. Obviously bogus data. Who is behind this group? The name alone sounds like some DNC-supported-Astroturf group. Ptui!
JHarp According to Pricewaterhouse Coopers that saving may reach over $2.1 trillion over a ten year period :
Doctors ordering tests or procedures not based on need but concern over liability or increasing their income is the biggest waste of health care dollars, costing the system at least $210 billion a year, according to the report. The problem is called “defensive medicine.”
“Sometimes the motivation is to avoid malpractice suits, or to make more money because they are compensated more for doing more,” said Dr. Arthur Garson, provost of the University of Virginia and former dean of its medical school. “Many are also convinced that doing more tests is the right thing to do.” (Source CNN)
From PriceWaterhouseCoopers http://www.ahip.org/redirect/TheFactorsFuelingRisingHealthcareCosts2006.pdf
“While the bulk of the premium dollar pays for medical services, those medical services include the cost of medical liability and defensive medicine. As malpractice premiums continue to rise, particularly in states that have not taken any action to contain the cost of the medical liability system, providers have responded in a number of ways, including
the practice of defensive medicine (e.g., where doctors, in order to mitigate the threat of lawsuits, order tests and procedures they believe are not medically necessary). A recent survey of Pennsylvania providers in six specialties revealed that 93 percent reported practicing defensive medicine.2 Defensive tests and treatment can pose unnecessary medical risks and add unnecessary costs to healthcare.3″
This adds adds up to about 10 percent of the cost of health care services.
Hey Cal J & jharp ( # 93): You guys are fighting and you’re on the same side……IDIOTS!
A liberal poster states, “an insurance company produces nothing”. Genius!
Now a question for that genius liberal: What does the government produce?
JHarp is a very determined individual. Unfortunately, he is dissilusioned by the extreme desire to prove everyone wrong, while preserving his dedicated desire to always be right. Hence the second unfortunately. Health care needs to me fixed. Obama wants to fix it, like Reagan did, rightly or wrongly and now the fringe …right wing aint happy. The good news is that the center right is determined to tackle this issue that (among other issues) has been neglected for the past twenty years. So, will it get fixed as it should be? No.
But something (besides congressional gas) will pass this year. So I really believe both sides in this argument/issue should be relieved. After all..money is too tight to mention and …its always about the money. Something to remember eh?
jharp, regarding the Portsmouth town hall meeting, the little girl’s mother not only ‘campaigned’ and ‘voted’ for Obama but donated thousands of dollars, as had her law firm. Oh, but these are ‘random folks’. Riiight.
blogprof already touched on it with his video reference – Massachusetts has the universal health coverage enacted in 2006. Whereas the costs are off-budget, imposed on the private sector. Becoming nearly 1/3 of their projected $1.3 billion deficit. Massachusetts answer?
Considering caps on insurance premiums, cuts in reimbursements to the providers and possibly a ‘global budget’ on health care spending.
Now, these same politicians are wanting to play this out nationwide.. frightening.
Lynn and Jeff Duntz,
You are easily duped.
The PriceWaterhouseCoopers study was commissioned by and paid for by… … you guessed it, the health insurance industry!
“AHIP Career Source is a service provided by America’s Health Insurance Plans – a national trade association representing nearly 1,300 member companies providing health benefits to more than 200 million Americans.”
http://www.ahipcareersource.org/
Really guys, wise up. You are voting against your own best interests.
Hannity monitoring Obama’s town hall . . . Hannity just made fun of a woman for saying, “Good afternoon, Mr. President” before she asked her question. What’s wrong with you people?
102. AThinkingPerson:
What do YOU produce?
“jharp, regarding the Portsmouth town hall meeting, the little girl’s mother not only ‘campaigned’ and ‘voted’ for Obama but donated thousands of dollars, as had her law firm.”
Link?
And why would that come as a surprise? People who go to town halls tend to be… you know… politically active.
“What does the government produce?”
Air traffic control, military, postal service, roads, bridges, dams, border control, customs, SEC, Consumer Product Safety Commission, funding for medical research, space exploration, and most importantly, just as we have just witnessed with the stimulus, the government provides stability from capitalism run amok.
Any other stupid questions?
This legislation is NOT about saving money OR better health care; It’s about Obama and his POWER to sign into law anything that will be seen as a MONUMENT TO HIM. It is a TOTAL POWER MOVE by the Democrat Congress.
They have already demonstrated they will LIE, CHEAT, AND STEAL anything they have to, to get their way. And DEMONIZE anyone whom gets in their way.
What other proof is needed?
Now and Then:
“Hannity monitoring Obama’s town hall . . . Hannity just made fun of a woman for saying, “Good afternoon, Mr. President” before she asked her question. What’s wrong with you people?”
It’s ignorance. Plain and simple.
Congratualations teabaggers. Looks like you are getting results.
“Dick Armey resigns from lobbying firm over his role in orchestrating teabag protests, town hall shut downs.”
Armey – “It is painful and frustrating to see a good, decent, able and effective partnership of honorable men and women and their clients attacked for things in which they are not involved simply because of their association with me.”
“Reading between the lines here, DLA Piper — concerned about Armey’s activism against an administration it seeks to influence — pushed him out.”
For those who know DLA Piper is the lobbying firm Armey worked for.
Jharp is consistent, any who disagree with the Negusa-Nagast are racists, any who dissent are “Teabaggers” (I guess that is a term most familiar to those who define themselves by how they “get off”, no idea what it means, and can care less), vapid, shallow, and demeaning (to those who use it).
So let’s all ignore the Genosse’s brown shirt and armband (though purple seems the color of the moment), and when he uses terms like “race traitor” or “Class enemy” he’s merely parroting his betters . . . there are treatments for terminal political blindness, but the first step is owning an open mind
89 ,92 ditto
all the bickering same points no matter what posting, same rude talking points/remarks to anyone that disagrees. It gets boring trying to slog through the bs spouted as a response to almost every post,
sounds like james carville responding/harping…
Try this on for size. Those defending Obama are utilizing only that information that the higher ups
want them to have.
Is this the first time that information has been rationed? Just like health care is in Canada, and Great Britain, and will be, if Obama gets his way,
in the United States.
JHARP–Are you a coward? Or an idiot? Defend your messiah!
JHARP/SHADOW/NOWANDTHEN–The only teabaggin’ going on is the one on your messiah’s chin, generously given to him by Tony Rezko.
jharp, why do you call the insurance companies monopolists when they have to compete with each other? You’re entire premise is utter nonsense. Why would they pass savings on to consumers? Maybe to steal business from all their competitors.
REQUIRING DRUG MANUFACTURERS TO PRO12
VIDE DRUG REBATES FOR FULL-BENEFIT DUAL ELIGI13
BLES.—Page 358 of HR 3200
…..don’t feed the troll.
watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related
save yourself the agravation and ignore them
For the idiots amongst us, I’ll answer the question since it seems you can’t…
THE GOVERNMENT DOESN’T PRODUCE ANYTHING! It taxes us and redistributes the money. That’s what our government does. Why liberals are so juvenile to think that for some reason the government (which has almost bankrupt SS and is now contemplating taking away Saturday delivery from the Post Office because it is so horribly managed) can better dole out your health care than a privately run company is beyond me.
Liberals must have mommy issues. They truly INSIST on being tied to somebody’s apron strings.
The constant lying.
The staggering arrogance.
The astounding incompetence.
The dangerous narcissism.
The Obama Buffoon seeks to put as much of the private economy under government control as possible to create his nanny state utopia where he is the boy king.
Let’s stand strong against this Marxist monster.
I find it interesting when people want to talk about the salary of a CEO of an insurance company, but don’t recognize that trial lawyers who make their living off of suing doctors are making much, much more money.
That money doesn’t just materialize out of thin air. It comes from an insurance company the vast majority of the times. True health care “reform” cannot occur without tort reform.
As a final way of thumbing her nose at anyone dumb enough to support her, Palin includes this incredible assault on credibility in her statement today:
The rationing system proposed by one of President Obama’s key health care advisors is particularly disturbing. I’m speaking of the “Complete Lives System” advocated by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the president’s chief of staff. President Obama has not yet stated any opposition to the “Complete Lives System,” a system which, if enacted, would refuse to allocate medical resources to the elderly, the infirm, and the disabled who have less economic potential.[1]
Palin seems quite confident that none of her supporters will have the brains or wherewithal to actually hit the link to that footnote where we find that the article is a treatise on ethical strategies when dealing with currently scarce medical interventions–most notably organ transplants! Our draconian health care system already has a lottery system for that simply because, as Emanuel notes, there just aren’t enough organs to go around.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions
They’re laughing at you people.
TORT REFORM. Two words: Loser Pays.
Here’s a related parody entitled “Obama Plan Calls for Making Health Care System More Efficient by Having Trial Lawyers Provide Medical Services More Directly”: http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/06/obama-plan-calls-for-making-health-care.html
Yes, jharps premise is utter nonsense (yet again). Let’s all just quit feeding the poor, angry jharp and maybe he can find another hobby besides trolling here. I, for one, am tired of the endless name calling (as if that helps his argument somehow) and the nonsensical commentary (as if that helps Obama’s argument somehow).
It would be nice if just once a liberal would stumble in here and make thoughtful, well thought out arguments and we could have an open dialogue. Instead we get people like jharp, Now and Then and the other kooks who call names, continually go off topic and offer nothing to the conversation.
I vote we ignore them until a liberal with a working brain comes along (if I live long enough that is).
Dear MOHO:
You know from nothing. Palin is right. Take a bit of time off tokes and look into the Canadian and
British healthcare systems. It is all about rationing. Limiting access. Take the bag off of youre head. You’ll be old one day also.
Who ever runs WalMart needs to give Obama some much needed advice..
agree, don’t feed the trolls…but, tomorrow someone probably will and he’ll be jumping up and down with his talking points in full force, it’s tiring..
AdumbasspersonIt would be nice if just once a liberal would stumble in here and make thoughtful, well thought out arguments and we could have an open dialogue.
Judging from our exchanges, I’m pretty sure you’d never know the difference.
Post number 3 is absolutely as it is.
I have been practicing primary care for 38 yrs and have seen the evolution to the current state.
Many many referrals, ER dumps and lab or imaging tests are done purely in self defense. I don’t believe the 2% claims. My estimation is that half of medical cost is wasted because of the tort system and CYA medical practice.
“So which is it — fairness or campaign dollars?”
Tort reform also has a benefit in that it can be enacted now, not 8 or 10 years from now, when Obamacare would actually take effect. Obama’s and Democrat’s devotion to idealogy are preventing pragmatic solutions to the cost problem.
Instead of malpractice insurance premiums, we may be forced to apply this money to more constructive purposes, like reducing the debt. Thanks to Obama, we’re gonna need it.
127 athinkingperson
Interesting . . . you decide to opine about who produces what, but when I ask you what YOU produce, you say I’m off topic. Better yet, you decide to “ignore” them from now on. I think I know why. It’s like watching a 10-year-old throw snowballs at cars and then running away. One day we’ll hear a genuine and courageous thought from a conservative, if I live that long.
127 . . . “kooks who call names” . . . think about that . . . classic birther/deather self-delusion
i wrote 2 comments, i see they are deleted. you must now be interested in the truth. hows hannidy and limbaugh doing and beck to. are you part of FOX news
Ok, it’s been two full days since I sent an e-mail to the site moderators pointing out to them that the filthy talk of many of the pro-obama people on this site make it a very unpleasant place to be.
They’ve posted their “rules” but aren’t applying them.
I agree with the poster above who observes that it’s very difficult to even follow the reasonings or arguments when there is the constant filth and gratuitous putdowns and ugliness.
Nowhere else in my life am I subject to porno talk. I find it difficult to believe that the moderators consider such filth an appropriate part of attempts at dialogue or, on another scale, that this supposed “conservative type” has to be so corrupted as to make it a very uncomfortable place to be.
I’m puzzled as to why the new “rules” were posted since they apparently aren’t going to be enforced. As I said, it’s been a full 48 hours now since I sent my note. I wanted to allow them time to apply their own rules and wondered if they would. I guess I have my answer.
Are they afraid? Do they agree with such language?
TO: Raja Besar, et al.
RE: It’s Getting Worse
I’m getting reports that doctors are no longer offering information/advice on what course of action to take regarding a serious disease or disorder.
Ask them a simple question, and they ignore you.
Then, at the end, they say, “It’s your decision.”
I witnessed this sort of action vis-a-vis an oncologist last year. I picked up a similar report from a credible source this last week. Another cancer patient.
This report included information received from other sources. Their suspicion is that THIS is the new CYA activity on the part of the medical industry.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth is coming out.....]
MOHO: that’s the problem. Too many Liberals stumbling about.
Note to jharp: Contrary to what your libtard friends have told you, the government does not produce roads and bridges and the Post Office, NASA or the rest of the nonsense you listed. Just in case you were raised under a stump by a family of jackals, the government COLLECTS TAXES and then REDISTRIBUTES THEM. Ever seen any of your Congresspeople out building a bridge or working a computer at NASA or delivering mail? Me either. Can you spell government contractors? Can you even pronounce government contractors? Do you know what the term means?
Again, it’s time to grow up and be a little more self sufficient. Cut those apron strings jharp. The government didn’t give birth to you so why do you expect them to raise you?
121. AThinkingPerson:
Right; And I’d like to add that they still need toilet training!
Moho… I’m sorry, was I supposed to read your Obama talking points memos as “dialogue”? My mistake of course.
I always thought that one of the main arguments against tort reform was that it would effectively put a value on human life. Aren’t the Democrats doing the same thing with the so called death panels and rationing care for those deemed unworthy? “I’m sorry, your life just isn’t worth the money we would have to spend on you.”
Tort reform is neither needed nor necessary in med mal cases. Please hear me out:
First, Runaway juries are rare in med mal cases: juries like doctors but will reqard patients as they should when a doc goofs. If your wife or husband were made a vegetable by a careless doctor, you’d feel the same. Lifetime care for a vegetable is expensive. Same with people that loose eyes, the wrong leg or mobility due to careless docs.
Second, many states have limited the emotional distress damages to 250,000 no matter how serious the harm. The awards of substance now are actual cost of care neeeded over some messed up person’s lifetime. The people damaged are entitled to it.
Third, aren’t the biggest impositions on the medical system and the cost of care in the last 30 years are: (a) illegals who do not have insurance (e.g., the man in Florida who was in a hospital for three years at cost of $1.5 mill per year); (b), the push on prices by state laws and judges that insist that all kinds of elective procedures– gender change ooperations, plastic surgery are great examples–have to be paid for by insurers and govt programs; (c), the weird laws that let US drug companies charge US patients for full price of product, but allow them to charge some other places–e.g., canadian health care–less than half of what we pay.
AThinkingPerson: Aug 14, 2009 – 3:08 pm
“I vote we ignore them until a liberal with a working brain comes along (if I live long enough that is).”
An entropy reversal in hell will come before that.
All the talk is about lawsuits against doctors. What about lawsuits against insurance companies? We’ll lose that in the “public option” since you can’t sue the government. This bill is so subjective that lawsuits will be ripe for the picking. But I guess lawyers would never sue the OBAMA government since he’s in their pockets.
JHARP/NOWANDTHEN/SHADOW: Your Messiah has failed.
136. Meryl:
“Ok, it’s been two full days since I sent an e-mail to the site moderators pointing out to them that the filthy talk of many of the pro-obama people on this site make it a very unpleasant place to be.”
This from the queen of scat references.
I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you!
140. Cybergeezer:
“Right; And I’d like to add that they still need toilet training!”
This is what passes for what . . . humor? BTW, . . .Meryl! Meryl? Another pro-Obama person is throwing around poopy words.
You who said lawyers hit the nail on the head. There are way too many lawyers out there writing laws and drumming up business.
Moho… I’m sorry, was I supposed to read your Obama talking points memos as “dialogue”? My mistake of course.
Of course not. Its quite obvious you’re not very good at reading. I have no more interest engaging you in dialogue about health care than I would discussing how many angels fit on the head of a pin with you. My point has been in every instance to show that you don’t know what you’re talking about. And its been easy to do so. Since almost all of your points are regurgitation of Republican talking points, it serves the purpose of enabling those here who aren’t quite as stupid as you to get an idea of why their discourse is considered so asinine in the outer world. Perhaps then they’ll do what you obviously never have and think for themselves, if only to escape the gravity of your field of shame.
follow-up to post #47
TRUE medical malpractice does happen, but it is about as common as female high school teachers having sex with their male students. I am a physician and know a lot of physicians. I have never seen it, certainly never been a part of it, or know a physician who is guilty of such. True malpractice is exceedingly rare. But, I have been sued.
Most lay folks have been indoctrinated (especially and primarily by trial lawyers) into thinking that whenever there is a bad outcome (and sometimes even when there isn’t), malpractice has occurred.
Well, if anyone would like, I can explain the REAL definition of medical malpractice. But, it is not what most believe, and certainly not what lawyers will tell you. The TRUE definition is very narrow, and as one very astute poster mentioned, does not happen often enough to support an entire parasitic industry. The definition has been drastically perverted and we are ALL paying the price, in both money and blood.
146. Bill’s Layer
Let me educate you and the other scriptologists here what’s coming:
Health Care Reform will pass, trimmed down, but it’s coming.
Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is ending.
DOMA is going away.
Medical marijuana will be the norm.
The economy will continue to recover.
The stock market will trade above 11,000.
David Vitter will get caught being diapered by a Bourbon Street hooker.
Glenn Beck will find himself in a cocaine-induced fetal position.
Rush Limbaugh will go deaf from oxycontin addiction.
Bill O’Reilly will pay $8 million hush money to prevent his threatening phone sex tapes from getting out.
Dick Morris will get caught on a DC balcony having his toes sucked by a hooker while he sings Popeye The Sailor man in his boxers.
Dick Cheney will get drunk and go hunting and shoot an old man in the face.
And Sarah Palin will continue to hide from any interviewer not named Greta.
(Sorry, those last seven things have already happened. My bad.)
And that’s just the first term.
Ling live the troll insurrection! Onward jharp and your like-minded truthers . . . tweaking the red bloated noses of cracker America, pointing with straight and steady finger the way forward, defending the principles of our founding fathers, flirting with the descendants of our founding mothers, and pushing down the arbitrary ethics and situational outrage of all people conservative.
Thank you, Jesus, for being on my side.
“You know from nothing. Palin is right.”
Of course she is. And their ‘debate’ tactic is the same, regardless of subject:
Point out that Obama has spent more money than all presidents in history: BUSH SPENT MONEY TOO!
Point out that the government taking over health care would require rationing: RATIONING SOMETIMES HAPPENS, RARELY, NOW, SO WHY NOT MAKE IT OFFICIAL POLICY?
Yadda yadda. The only time they don’t fall to this argument? When they’re busy pretending real people rejecting Obama (approval rating: below 47%!), rejecting his ‘health care’ (approval rating: below 30%!) and rejecting their Congress (approval rating: below 20%!) are ‘crazy’, they always seem to forget the eight years of crazy left-wingers and all their antics.
These are not serious people. They have no real ideas, causes, or concerns, other than repeating lies to further their fascist agenda. They are worse than trolls – they are traitors.
153 atheisticconservative (by the way, is there another kind?)
I’m not a fascist. You’re a fascist.
your turn.
We have a family friend, who is an ObGyn. His standard of living was hardly “luxurious”, but comfortable middle class. He is held in high regard by his colleagues (I’ve talked to some). In nearly 30 years practicing here, he has *never* been sued. He finally had to pack up and leave our state because he could NO LONGER AFFORD to pay his malpractice insurance rates here. They GO UP whether a Dr. has been sued or not!
Tort reform should be at the top of the list – but reform isn’t obummer’s agenda. It is control.
12. Bob:
Look at it this way: If you negligently drive your car and hit a doctor, he or she can recover unlimited damages. But, under tort reform, if a doctor negligently screws up your medical care, you can only recover a limited amount. Is that your idea of justice?
~~~~
having a loser’s lawyer pays legal fee’s IS my idea of justice. It would IMMEDIATELY have the effect chilling EVERY SINGLE medical malpractice lawyer unless he had a rock solid case. (and send the less than sure defendents lawyer to a settlement table.) Most AREN’T.
Most Dr’s are like my sil’s ob. (one field with a VERY high rate of suits) She asked him if he’d ever been sued – once. He was sued by a couple with a less than perfect infant and they wanted someone else to pay the medical bills. He won, they lost, but their lawyer made money from them. Money they would have been better off using for their medically fragile infant.
We also have a local Ob practice that makes ALL new pregnant patients sign an affidavit stating they understand NOT ALL pregnancies end with a perfect baby. And they don’t, no matter what the Dr does.
117. billslayer:
“JHARP/SHADOW/NOWANDTHEN–The only teabaggin’ going on is the one on your messiah’s chin, generously given to him by Tony Rezko.”
Someone said it earlier and I agree. You seem to be a little preoccupied with something that has nothing to do with the debate.
Not that there is anything wrong with that.
Yet the fact is it’s off topic and in direct violation of rule #2.
“Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:”
2. Stay on topic.
Folks, the medical issue, while of critical importance in a personal way to many americans, is small Potatos to what is STILL going on with our Shakey banks…
http://www.bloggybayou.com/2009/08/market-ticker-called-this-one-to-me_14.html
If this is true, we are in for one hell of a ride… This is just the beginning of the finacial storm, not near the end…
If all of this was about reducing the cost of health care, then tort reform would have been part of the plan a long time ago. But of course, this is not about health care. It is about political power.
We get the same BS about malpractice insurance being 1% of health care. That ignores defensive medicine (pushing the cost up to around 25%) and the fact that the cost is centralized in a few very important fields. We are losing OBGYN practices (thanks John Edwards), orthopedic surgeons, gastros, and other specialists at an alarming rate (especially in blue states).
But reigning in these government approved thieves would take away a huge chunk of change from the Dem coffers, so they will have to stick to smearing the healthcare providers and the insurance industry.
@ MOHO, Good catch finding Beck make a fool of himself. However you fail to present a real argument here. Beck is complaining that the people at the hospital don’t care about you and calls our system a nightmare.
If our system is a nightmare I would hate to experience health care in other countries because ours is still the best. What portion of Obama’s transformation of our health care system will make the PEOPLE care about the patients? None, and so everything he was complaining about there cannot be fixed, but it can be made worse as witnessed by using any government run agency.
@PJM I thought you were censoring your comments sections, and while I know it is difficult I see several people making personal attacks and even one racial slur, none of which adds to the conversation.
Every minute counts.
A Thinking Person – be weary of Moho. For Moho believes Governors control the day-to-day dealings of hospitals..!
If that were the case, the garbage-like hospitals representing most of Illinois would be taken from ‘Governor Quinn’s control and ‘frozen’ too – right Moho?
Staying on topic – the Government hasn’t a place in the health care arena. They’d blown through $2 billion in a week for the clunkers program. Not to mention the mess ‘Universal Health Care’ has run amok in MA.
jharp, “What does the government produce?”
-Air traffic control – You do realize our ATC is years behind technologically than the privately run industry (i.e. Canada)/
-Postal service – Can’t compete in the 21st Century, digital age.
-Border control – This is the worst run, P C run program in existence.
-Customs – See ‘Border Control’ comment
-SEC – Yeah, they did a heck of a job ‘uncovering’ Madoff, Fannie & Freddie, banking industry et al.
-Consumer Product Safety Commission – a pimply faced kid who needs a job for the summer can do the CPSC’s job.
-’Stimulus’ money – supposed to create 3 million jobs, unemployment to be under 8%. Today: Unemployment is 3% higher with Obama and the ‘stimulus’ money has lined the pockets of special interest groups (you know, other community organizers.. birds of a feather), lobbyists and myriad of other ‘needed groups’. Such as the NEA who gave $25,000 of its stimulus money to ‘Perverts Put Out’
TO: All
RE: jharp: Typical Progressive Hypocrisy
Seems jharp either can’t remember thinks he said earlier, or he’s a true hypocrite.
For instance…..
In item #157 we have jharp saying….
However, earlier, jharp had this to say…..
In the typical
‘progressive’er….bolshevik, i.e., jharp….approach to discussion. It’s okay for them to make ad hom attackes. But not for others to recipricate in kind.These people ARE ‘evil’.
Christ has a special place in His heart for hypocrites. And I can understand why.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. I would not be surprised to find out that the guy with the Death to Obama sign was another bolshevik false-flag effort. Like some other efforts on their part.
From what I can see of him in the picture, he reminds me of Steve Martin….a “wild and crazy guy”…..
TO: All
RE: Errata
The quote from jharp at #157 should read as follows:
Hadn’t had any coffee yet….
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[There's too much blood in my caffine system.]
I know this might be off topic, but I was thinking of the man who was in charge of the Victim’s Compensation Fund. I saw a show with him speaking about the decisions of who and how much was paid to the families of the victims who died on September 11th. After googling, I found this story:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1903547,00.html
Interesting that his services were sought by the Obama Administration on executive compensation using bailout funds.
I don’t know why, but I thought of him for some reason while pondering the rising cost of US Health Care.
Isn’t it weird that those of us who thought that Obama hated EVERYTHING about the Bush Administration somehow finds it prudent to seek the services of someone involved in the Bush Administration.
Weird. Hope and Change.
Bill was right. “First thing we do is kill all the lawyers.”
MOHO: Well tell us. Exactly how stupid are you????
Take a look at this by Daniel Hannan, the English speaking right of centre lawmaker with the most credibility, anywhere:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100006578/the-nhs-row-my-final-word/
As an aside, KOR was a group that was part of Poland, and they were Trotskyites. In other words, Brezhnev and crew in the Kremlin were softliners compared to them.
Thanks to KOR, demands on the Polish gov’t increased to such an extent that martial law was deemed necessary.
It looks like some of the trolls posting here are
applying the same play book.
Frankly it is enough to make the case, and then leave the provocateurs be. For they are operating like Richard Warman, a former member of the Human Rights Commission of Canada who keeps on drumming up business for the Human Rights Commission of Canada.
Just take a look at http://www.ezralevant.com and I think a search can be done regarding Richard Warman, and the entries will come up.
Of course, even though they act like lone wolves,
there is coordination taking place, and Jennifer Lynch, up here in Canada, is one of the higher ranking personages who are convinced that a threat has to undergo the treatment of changing a molehill into a mountain, in order for the Human Rights Commissions to exist.
Which, when applied to south of the Canada/US border shows the need for what Obama and crew deem to be necessary. Namely, that they are right regardless of what an even handed analysis
of the situation says.
Anyone else watch Obama selling his plan at the town-hall in CO? He hasn’t given a straight answer yet.
It’s interesting how the bill allows price fixing for medical procedures, but hardly addresses the burden of malpractice, defensive medicine, lawyer fees, or the skyrocketing price of tuition. When I get out of dental school, I will have over $200,000 in student loan debt (and I went to a public university). If I were to buy a practice right out of school, which a decent number of students do especially in rural areas where the old dentists are retiring right and left, my debt could be half a million dollars or more. Add to that the opportunity cost of eating mac & cheese and pulling all nighters for a minimum of 8 years for a dentist; 13 or more for a physician. I’m a first-generation college student from a low-income family and I did get some scholarships, but the rest I will be paying for decades.
Luckily for me, dental malpractice insurance is a lot less expensive compared to medical malpractice. I have no idea how the upcoming med school graduates are going to make it financially or mentally, with the ridiculous number of hours they have to work and the number of patients they have to cram into their work day, and living in fear of getting sued or slandered into poverty for every innocent mistake. And yet, Obama thinks that price fixing procedures is going to yield better access to health care? He’s not even addressing the REAL reasons that health care is so expensive.
Making a martyr out of doctors is not going to increase access to care, it’s just going to reduce the quality of care as fewer bright, hard-working students seek medical careers and instead seek 9-5 jobs where they’re not enslaved by politicians and the handout-happy public.
See if this describes Obama-care: NB: This is from 2006.
July 9, 2006
Health care shell game fraudulent
By Tom Brodbeck
Trying to make sense of Manitoba’s massive health care bureaucracy is no easy feat.
It’s something I tried to do this past week when we published the salaries of the highest paid pencil pushers in the system.
What I found out pretty quickly is that government often moves people around from one layer of bureaucracy to another, sometimes forcing bureaucrats into conflicting roles.
Which makes it very difficult for the public to find out who works for whom and who is responsible for what when examining regional health authorities, Manitoba Health and hospital administrations.
When you want to find out how much taxpayers are paying bureaucrats, you have to get hold of something called a compensation disclosure report, which lists all employees at a government agency with salaries of $50,000 or more.
By law, any organization that gets most of its funding through tax dollars has to produce such a list.
But when it comes to the health care bureaucracy, it’s not that simple.
Take Arlene Wilgosh, the deputy minister of health for Manitoba. She’s the top bureaucrat overseeing a $3-billion department, including funding for regional health authorities.
If you look her up in Manitoba Health’s compensation disclosure report, though, you won’t find her.
Her salary is not there, even though she’s paid by the department.
That’s because while she works for the department, she’s listed under the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority’s compensation disclosure report.
She’s been “seconded” to Manitoba Health but she keeps her position with the regional health authority.
Confusing? You bet.
There’s more
But there’s more. She doesn’t actually have a position at the WRHA, even though she’s listed under their payroll.
Her position is with the Regional Health Authorities of Manitoba, where she used to work. But RHA’s of Manitoba — another layer of bureaucracy whose function is a mystery — do their payroll through the WRHA. They’re not paid by the WRHA, they’re paid by the RHA’s of Manitoba. The WRHA just does the paperwork for them.
Also, RHA employees work in WRHA offices at 155 Carlton St. in downtown Winnipeg. But we’re told they don’t actually work for the WRHA.
What a rat’s nest.
How can someone be the head a provincial department which oversees, among other things, regional health authorities but is still technically an employee of the agency she’s supposed to be overseeing?
It’s a conflict.
If you look closer, you’ll see all kinds of people “seconded” back and forth between the WRHA and Manitoba Health, not really knowing where they work.
As far as I’m concerned, if you switch organizations, you should become an employee of that organization and you should get paid through their payroll so everything is open and transparent.
Instead, they play hide-the-pea in a political shell game.
They also put some bureaucrats in more than one position, often in roles that conflict with each other.
Real Cloutier, for example, is the vice president of long-term care for the WRHA. He’s supposed to oversee all the personal care homes and other long-term care agencies.
Yet at the same time, they made him CEO of Deer Lodge Centre, a facility he’s supposed to oversee as VP.
How do you make independent resource decisions for all of the city’s personal care homes when you’re also the CEO of one of them?
It’s a conflict. Naturally they bumped up his salary when he took on the additional role.
The other thing the Doer government has done is merged the province’s largest hospital — Health Sciences Centre — with the WRHA.
So when you want to see how much the WRHA bureaucracy has grown, you can’t get a separate list of WRHA bureaucrats and how much they make.
They report HSC and WRHA together, including bureaucrats from both entities, so you don’t always know who works for whom.
The only way we know there are more people working at the WRHA is by comparing their phone directory from one year to the next. Naturally, the WRHA says comparing phone directories is not an accurate measurement of how the WRHA has grown.
Then give us a separate costing that shows the size of the bureaucracy at the WRHA.
It’s the same kind of tactics they use when they count patients treated in emergency room hallways. They count the number of patients in the hallway then subtract the number of empty spots elsewhere in the ER and present the fudged number as fact to the public on their website.
It’s fraudulent.
And it’s all designed to prevent the public from knowing what’s really going on in health care.
This is how the NDP government is spending your money these days.
Tom Brodbeck is the Winnipeg Sun’s city columnist.
Plus there is this:
July 4, 2006
Health cash cows
By TOM BRODBECK
They have trouble staffing the front lines of health care but the bureaucrats running the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority never seem short of cash when it comes to padding their own wallets.
According to the WRHA’s 2005 compensation disclosure report, WRHA CEO Brian Postl continued to haul in one of the biggest salaries of any government bureaucrat in Manitoba last year, taking in a cool $358,923.
Postl’s pay is up slightly from $352,345 in 2004.
About one-sixth of it was paid by Health Canada because Postl has been spending some of his time heading a federal wait-time committee.
Seems things are working so well at Winnipeg hospitals that Postl has extra time to work on a federal project.
Nice.
It’s not like there’s a crisis in our hospital emergency rooms or anything.
No matter. There’s an army of well-paid bureaucrats working under Postl to pick up the slack.
Brock Wright, the WRHA’s chief medical officer, came in second on the salary list, cashing in $273,231 in 2005, up from $267,374 the year before.
Senior brass
Sharon Macdonald, vice-president of community health, also made the $200,000-plus club with a $238,056 T4 slip last year.
Now you know where all your health-care money is going.
And it’s not just the most senior brass at the WRHA gobbling up all the money, either.
There are scores of middle managers at the WRHA office downtown paid in the $100,000 to $130,000 range.
You’d be amazed at the number of positions they’ve created at this place over the years, including a chief privacy officer making $100,767, a director of community development paid $100,579 and an administrative director making $100,767.
There’s a regional director of pharmacy services making $120,586, who apparently needs the help of at least two regional pharmacy managers paid $109,114 and $108,267 each.
They’ve got enough managers, directors and analysts at this place to run a small country.
There are at least two directors of quality improvement (not sure what they do) one making $186,566 the other paid $133,185.
Must be an important job. They need two of them.
They should send them to our hospital ERs.
We need a little quality improvement there.
And then there are scads of other lower-paying bureaucratic jobs, such as community team managers paid in the $65,000 to $85,000 range and communications co-ordinators making $60,000 to $70,000.
There are now 328 people working at the WRHA, including 95 directors and managers.
Of course, none of these people provide any sort of direct health services to the public. They’re supposedly there to provide the administrative support for hospitals, home care and personal-care homes.
But the ratio of bureaucrats to health-care staff is out of whack.
We’ve got all these bureaucrats working at 155 Carlton St. but we’re short 15 emergency room doctors.
Something’s wrong with that picture.
When the former Filmon government set up regional health authorities in the 1990s, the whole point was to reduce bureaucratic overlap and make the system more efficient by running health care from a central authority.
It hasn’t worked.
We’ve got more bureaucracy and the quality of health care hasn’t improved.
They still can’t manage ERs, wait times for diagnostic tests and surgery are still as long as they were before — longer in some cases — and we still have hallway medicine, despite the claim by Premier Gary Doer that there are now “zero” patients in ER hallways.
All we’ve got is a bunch of over-paid bureaucrats working in a fancy downtown office.
Not much value for my money.
170. AThinkingPerson wrote:
Anyone else watch Obama selling his plan at the town-hall in CO? He hasn’t given a straight answer yet.
Peter writes: I hear somehow somebody who was not a Dem Party plant actually made it into the Montana Town Hall meeting and got to ask a question about where all the money for this is supposed to come from?
Guess some Dem Party screener will be looking for a new job as of today.
Obama (after the TH meeting): How in He## did a damn teaba#### get in my press confer… I mean, town hall meeting?
171. Ellie wrote:
If I were to buy a practice right out of school, which a decent number of students do especially in rural areas where the old dentists are retiring right and left, my debt could be half a million dollars or more.
Peter writes: Aren’t you oh so glad that Obama is going to be able to tell you how much you he will ‘allow’ you to earn if this bill passes?
Like the national debt he sent soring, your grandchildren will still be paying your loans.
#166..NukeET….If we killed all the lawyers there would be no judicial, legislative or executive branch of government. ‘Never Mind’.
As a physician, I can tell you that Tort reform is an absolute must. But it may need to go beyond a $250K cap. Putting a cap on non-economic damages will not stop me from practicing defensive medicine. There has to be a change in the system of judgement, possibly by peers to see if there was a deviation from standard of care, also a removal of Frivolous lawsuits. I am absolutely livid about Obama’s insistence on not looking at the money spent in malpractice, money lost in defensive medicine, etc. Why protect the lawyer’s bank accounts? With this article, it’s obvious why. So much for choosing what’s right vs being bought. Without some sort of drastic change to the legal system involved with healthcare, ANY plan put in to place will most likely continue to fail with spiralling costs that are out of control. And even more so, I guarantee that we will see doctors leave the healthcare field. I am one of them. Practicing medicine does not bring me the joy or satisfaction that I expected. 100% of the time I am looking over my shoulder. Thinking, what type of patient is this? Are there red flags? Do I need to order x,y,z tests to protect myself? Should I just give them the antibiotics even though it is not indicated because in the rare chance they somehow develop an infection (even though they might not have one now), they are going to claim they did and sue me??? The list goes on and on. Where have the doctors voices been in this? And NO, the A.M.A. does not speak for us.
Stealth Health?
Anytime government gets involved where it shouldn’t be involved, things usually tend to get screwed up. Indeed, anytime government gets involved in matters where it should constitutionally be involved, there’s the potential for a mess. Think United States Postal Service.
Likewise, when governmental figures campaign and campaign hard for some scheme or other and then backtrack big time on major features of that scheme, cynic that I am, I smell a rat. Think Obamacare.
In recent days, Obama surrogates seem to have backed off on two previously-essential elements of the Obama health care plan: end of life consults, aka ”death panels,” and now seem to have dumped the whole idea of “single payer,” aka government-run health care.
Today, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebellius dropped that latter bombshell in an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Nation,” saying, according to Bloomberg.com, that “government-run insurance isn’t essential to the Obama administration’s proposed overhaul of U.S. health care:” http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aRqy6w7DFAB0#.
I suspect something is awry when the Obamaites seem set to abandon that single payer, “public option,” which Obama has advocated for years while denying he has so advocated. It was the most fundamental change in his push for reform and to scrap it at this point is beyond mysterious.
Granted, other factors are in play, including . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)
In all the townhalls Obama has conducted, I have not heard one single comment from him about the outrageous health costs of ambulance chasing. After all, lawyers are his lifeblood. If tort reform is left out of any health care act, it will be dishonest and an indication of plain old Chicago politics plain and simple.
My brother who lives in Florida has had doctors tell him on his first visit that they have no medical insurance and they own nothing, it is all in their wifes name. Lawyers aren’t going to waste their time suing them. May be the way all doctors do it in the end as our govt is to invested in vengeance for the so called have not’s. A group that has proven to be a bane on my country for as far back as I can remember. I guess they are necessary for the left, they are easy to milk and bring much reward the left and their henchmen.
If you read the Dartmouth study you find out that the difference in healthcare cost per community has nothing to do with malpractice costs. Of coures I would not expect that any wingnut will read the report because they live in a fantasy world where facts are meaningless. It is only opinion that counts and facts are those thing tha could get in teh way of opinion no matter how idiotic.
SO I thought I would post this brief article here:
“10 Steps to Better Health Care
Health Care, Medicare
Atul Gawande, Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Donald Berwick, Institute for Healthcare Improvement
Elliott Fisher, Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice
Mark B. McClellan, Director, Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform
The New York Times
Save Print E-mail Share DeliciousDiggDiigoFacebookGoogle
LinkedInLiveNewsvineStumbleUponYahoo
August 12, 2009 —
We have reached a sobering point in our national health-reform debate. Americans have recognized that our health system is bankrupting us and that we have dealt with this by letting the system price more and more people out of health care. So we are trying to decide if we are willing to change — willing to ensure that everyone can have coverage. That means banishing the phrase “pre-existing condition.” It also means finding ways to pay for coverage for those who can’t afford it without help.
RELATED CONTENT
Research and Commentary
Show Me the Money: Options for Financing Health Reform
Mark B. McClellan, Alliance for Health Reform, July 2009
Research and Commentary
Policy Changes to Improve Health Care Quality
Mark B. McClellan, Congressional Health Care Caucus, May 18, 2009
Research and Commentary
Fostering Accountable Health Care: Moving Foward in Medicare
Elliott Fisher, Health Affairs, January 27, 2009
More Related Content »
Both of these steps stir heated argument, not to mention lobbyists’ hearts. But what creates the deepest unease is considering what we will have to do about the system’s exploding costs if pushing more people out is no longer an option. We have really discussed only two options: raising taxes or rationing care. The public is understandably alarmed.
There is a far more desirable alternative: to change how care is delivered so that it is both less expensive and more effective. But there is widespread skepticism about whether that is possible.
Yes, many European health systems have done it, but we are not Europe. And evidence that places like the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota or the Cleveland Clinic are doing it is likewise dismissed because their unique structures (for example, their physicians work on salary rather than being paid for each service) make them seem as far from Middle America as Sweden is.
Yet in studying communities all over America, not just a few unusual corners, we have found evidence that more effective, lower-cost care is possible.
To find models of success, we searched among our country’s 306 Hospital Referral Regions, as defined by the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care, for “positive outliers.” Our criteria were simple: find regions with per capita Medicare costs that are low or markedly declining in rank and where federal measures of quality are above average. In the end, 74 regions passed our test.
So we invited physicians, hospital executives and local leaders from 10 of these regions to a meeting in Washington so they could explain how they do what they do. They came from towns big and small, urban and rural, North and South, East and West. Here’s the list: Asheville, N.C.; Cedar Rapids, Iowa; Everett, Wash.; La Crosse, Wis.; Portland, Me.; Richmond, Va.; Sacramento; Sayre, Pa.; Temple, Tex.; and Tallahassee, Fla., which, despite not ranking above the 50th percentile in terms of quality, has made such great recent strides in both costs and quality that we thought it had something to teach us.
If the rest of America could achieve the performances of regions like these, our health care cost crisis would be over. Their quality scores are well above average. Yet they spend more than $1,500 (16 percent) less per Medicare patient than the national average and have a slower real annual growth rate (3 percent versus 3.5 percent nationwide).
Caveat: Because we relied on Medicare data for our selections, it is possible that some of these regions are not so low-cost from the viewpoint of non-Medicare patients. But overall data strongly suggest that most of these regions are providing excellent care for all patients while being far more successful than others at not overusing or misusing health care resources.
So how do they do that? Some have followed the Mayo model, with salaried doctors employed by a unified local system focused on quality of care: these include Temple, where the Scott and White clinic dominates the market, and Sayre, where the Guthrie Clinic does. Other regions, including Richmond and Everett, look more like most American communities, with several medical groups whose physicians are paid on a traditional fee-for-service basis. But they, too, have found ways to protect patients against the damaging incentives of a system that encourages fragmentation of care and the pursuit of revenues over patient needs.
The physicians and hospital leaders from Cedar Rapids told us how they have adopted electronic systems to improve communication among physicians and quality of care. Last year, they decided to investigate the overuse of CAT scans. They examined the data and found that in just one year 52,000 scans were done in a community of 300,000 people. A large portion of them were almost certainly unnecessary, not to mention possibly harmful, as CAT scans have about 1,000 times as much radiation exposure as a chest X-ray.
“I was embarrassed for us,” said Jim Levett, a cardiac surgeon and the head of a large physician group. More important, the area’s doctors and clinics are turning that embarrassment into change by seeking out solutions to reduce the expense and harm of unnecessary scans.
That number of scans in Cedar Rapids may seem shocking, but there is nothing surprising about it. Nationwide, we do 62 million CAT scans a year for 300 million people. So Cedar Rapids’s rate was actually better than average. But all medicine is local. And until a community confronts what goes on in its own population — to the point of actually seeking the data and engaging those who can solve the problem — nothing will change.
The team from Portland told us of a collaboration of doctors, state officials, insurers and community leaders to improve care. For more than four years, physicians have been tracking some 60 measures of quality, like medication error rates for their patients, and meeting voluntary cost-reduction goals.
Asheville, after gaining state support to avoid antitrust concerns, merged two underutilized hospitals. In Sacramento, a decade of fierce competition among four rival health systems brought about elimination of unneeded beds, adoption of new electronic systems for patient data and a race to raise quality. Sacramento also went from being one of America’s high-cost areas for health care to being among the low-cost elite.
In their own ways, each of these successful communities tells the same simple story: better, safer, lower-cost care is within reach. Many high-cost regions are just a few hours’ drive from a lower-cost, higher-quality region. And in the more efficient areas, neither the physicians nor the citizens reported feeling that care is “rationed.” Indeed, it’s rational.
Many in Congress and the Obama administration seem to recognize this. The various reform bills making their way through the process have included provisions to protect successful medical communities by incorporating payment approaches that reward those that slow spending growth while improving patient outcomes. This is the right direction for reform.
There is a lot of troubling rhetoric being thrown around in the health care debate. But we don’t need to be trapped between charges that reforms will ration care and doing nothing about costs and coverage. We must instead look at the communities that are already redesigning American health care for the better, and pursue ways for the nation to follow their lead.
Atul Gawande directs the Center for Surgery and Public Health at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and is a staff writer at The New Yorker; Donald Berwick is the president of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement in Cambridge, Mass.; Elliott Fisher directs policy-reform efforts at the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice; and Mark McClellan is the director of health care reform policy at the Brookings Institution. All are physicians.
The only thing that capping injury awards would do is lower the price of malpractice insurance, particularly for doctors who have had to settle in the past. Medical malpractice would simply receive a slap on the wrist. How is this helpful at all?
seriously “Do they really think the current system is the best we can do? Do conservatives even understand the issue? Many yelling townhall attendees don’t even understand that Medicade or the VA hospital are government run.”
I suspect that is exactly what they understand. That the Government isn’t doing a great job of Medicade and VA and are rightly scared to have them run the whole mess! You just made the whole point of the health care debate. Way to go. BTW, why are lefties such fans of lawyers all of a sudden? Aren’t they rich white folk?? Oh, they messiah likes them and is one, so now they are wonderful people.
OK, I don’t want people who have been injured to be punished. However, what would be wrong with limiting attorney’s charges. Say, 33% of the judgement or no more than $250,000 plus expenses. In other words, don’t cap neglience awards just cap lawyers’ fees…..
I do believe it is unfair to show how much more obama received from the legal industry without showing his total contributions.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/weekly.php?type=Qtrs&cand1=N00009638&cand2=N00006424&cycle=2008
If you look at the numbers, what the legal industry gave obama is about the same they gave mccain ratio wise…
In general everyone gave more money to obama.
I used to be suggested this website by way of my cousin. I’m no longer certain whether this publish is written by way of him as nobody else recognize such targeted approximately my difficulty. You are amazing! Thanks!