Tort Reform Ignored

[JMO Fan]

Howard Dean fesses up - can't fight trial lawyers:

Dean says Obamacare authors don't want to challenge trial lawyers By: Mark Tapscott 08/26/09 5:50 PM EDT
...[F]ormer Democratic National Committee chairman and presidential candidate Howard Dean let something incredibly candid slip out about President Obama's health-care reform bill in Congress.
Asked by an audience member why the legislation does nothing to cap medical malpractice class-action lawsuits against doctors and medical institutions (aka "Tort reform"), Dean responded by saying: "The reason tort reform is not in the [health care] bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on. And that's the plain and simple truth,"
...
Those contributions are why Dean knows it would be a difficult task indeed for Obama to persuade congressional Democrats to do anything that might offend the trial-lawyers lobby

Dean says Obamacare authors don't want to challenge trial lawyers | Washington Examiner

It seems amazing that this true cost-saver, tort reform, isn't even part of the proposal.

 

[Mr. Bill]

"the people who wrote it"?

Wow, did Howard Dean have a Glenn Beck moment?

Who ARE these people???

 

[Mac1958]

The Democrats aren't going to include Tort Reform because they're in bed with the lawyers' lobbies. They're willing to bypass legitimate cost savings to save their own political skins. At least Dean admits it.

The health care bill, whatever it looks like, will be a political document. And when you have politicians (and I'm talking about both parties) creating such a critical plan, you'll end up with a mess.

I continue to have difficulty undertstanding why so many people put their faith in professional politicians.

 

[G.Gordon]

Without Tort reform there this bill will do little to reduce cost.

Preventative medicine = test, proceedures, and examinations done for the sole purpose of covering all bases and reduce lawsuit liability.

Until that one eliment of our heathcare system is changed... nothing gets fixed.

Of course there is the argument of: How do you sue the gub'ment when the gub'ment is your healthcare.

 

[Winter_123]

"the people who wrote it"?

Wow, did Howard Dean have a Glenn Beck moment?

Actually, I think Dean is having a "buy my book" moment.

I must confess joyfully that Dean has somewhat fallen off of my radar screen but he was in Maine the other day spouting off about health reform and I thought, jeez, this guy is really out on a limb as head of the DNC and taking shots at the Obama "plan" and promoting a book while head of the DNC and out on the trail. Come to find out, I am probably the only who doesnt know that he is no longer head of the DNC, plus I am unable to tell you who the current head is. Alzheimer's or repression or simply deleting junk from my mind? You decide. But that is what he is up to. He hawks his book at the end of every spouting off session.

Same with John Edwards. You talk about dem leaders and tort reform and there is a trial lawyer right there who could weigh in for the better or the worse on that topic but he is off my radar screen. Couldnt tell you what is up to these days, and I am okay with that. Creates no void in my life whatsoever.

I do miss the updates on Cynthia McKinney though. I should set some type of google "loon alert" or something so that I get an alert on her "activities."

 

[ABC]

I have to admit at least Dean is honest.
That was a true honest answer to a question.

 

[bobson]

I'm not a fan of limiting a patients recourse if something goes amuck. What we need is a medical court. The jury of a doctor's peers should be other doctors, not Joe Schmoe from Marvin's House of Beer.

I've read the testimony in a medical malpractice case and I had a hard time understanding any of it.

 

[Winter_123]

I'm not a fan of limiting a patients recourse if something goes amuck. What we need is a medical court. The jury of a doctor's peers should be other doctors, not Joe Schmoe from Marvin's House of Beer.

I've read the testimony in a medical malpractice case and I had a hard time understanding any of it.

Over time, Obama will make any doctor who accepts public funds a quasi-governmental employee. Thus they will have sovereign immunity and will be immune from tort actions unless the government gives its permission to sue.

Change you can believe in.

 

[ABC]

If they would just put caps on the amount you can sue for that would have a big impact. I live in a state that has cap. We have some of the best medicine in the country especially in acute care.

Now I do not think it would stop Doc's from ordering unnecessary procedures. These facilities make a lot of money of that aspect of care. If any of you are working claims for your client take a look at what is being charged for diagnostic services.

 

[somarco]

Without Tort reform there this bill will do little to reduce cost.

Preventative medicine = test, proceedures, and examinations done for the sole purpose of covering all bases and reduce lawsuit liability.

There is really nothing in the bill(s), or even talked about from the bully pulpit, that will have an impact on reducing the cost of health care.

For sure, tort reform will go a long way, but since Congress is what, 90% lawyers, don't expect them to do anything that actually, um, you know, makes sense . . .