Posted on 08/23/2009 12:20:14 PM PDT by ScaniaBoy
Plaintiffs' attorneys better watch out. When Bob Beckel, uber-Democrat and manager of Walter Mondale's 1984 presidential campaign, agrees on something with outspoken conservative Sarah Palin, last year's Republican nominee for vice president, it's time to take notice. That's especially true when they agree on a major stumbling block to health care reform, the single biggest issue in American politics today.
Mrs. Palin and Mr. Beckel agree that health care reform can't move forward unless lawyers have their sails trimmed a bit. They are right.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Here is the link to her facebook piece: Sarah Palin: No Health Care Reform Without Legal Reform
PING!
You’ll notice that Palin’s Facebook post about Tort Reform has not gained nearly the amount of attention as her previous post about 0bamacare. My guess is that the media is now moving into ignore mode, for the simple fact that if they publicized it tort reform would become the rallying cry against 0bamacare right along with “death panels.” That is why we should spread the word about her tort reform post as much as we can, email it to friends, relatives, and anyone else interested in the 0bamacare debate.
" such as when "pregnant women in rural central Mississippi (for example) travel 65 miles to locate obstetric wards to deliver because family practitioners at local hospitals faced with rising malpractice insurance premiums stopped providing obstetric services."
Why does the gub'mint believe that they can force doctors to perform abortions against their beliefs, but not force OB's to continue providing their services?
I wonder if some type of tort reform with teeth were added whether it would attract more Republicans than the Democrats who would flee from it.
Are there enough Democrats who want a bill “at any cost” who would agree to that? Are there enough Republicans that would trust the Dems not to either de-fang tort reform or scrub entirely when it got to committee?
I have my doubts that a) the Dems would agree to meaningful tort reform and b) enough Repubs would agree to socialized medicine in return for getting tort reform. I don’t think I’d touch it.
Bob Beckel is a perfect example of why Fox News is *way* more “fair & balanced” than most of the rest. The guy is such a rude, hyper-partisan lout that I simply change the channel to something less offensive until they have moved to the next segment. IMHO, he makes Carville look almost reasonable.
Quite right. She was extremely clever adding those “signal” words “death panels” to the first article. No journalist could stop themselves from reporting on that.
They wanted to show how stupid the woman was, but it was a trap - set by an expert trapper - and they all got caught. Now they are more wary, and maybe her articles are more “difficult” for the so called intellectuals to digest anyway.
But they are still discussed and her following on FaceBook is growing. However, spread the word and make sure other Freepers do the same.
Tort reform is going to damage the Dims, but saying no to tort reform is also damaging. So it is a win-win situation. (Note also, that she says with the tort reform you are removing most i not all of the financial reasons for an all-encompassing health care reform.)
See my comment above this one.
So how can we possible have tort reform when all our doctors are lined up waiting to cut off our limbs.
/s/
Better terminology than “tort reform” has to be found. When most people think of tort, they envision a layered cake, not anything to do with lawyers.
Just like “cap and trade”. The title is not descriptive of what it actually is - most likely on purpose.
That’s why the “death panel” nomenclature was so effective. People knew immediately what it was.
I don’t think we should let politicians get away with naming something in order to obfuscate its meaning.
You should read the Bob Beckel article. The GOP is getting sucker punched. In case anybody is really interested in what the “out of control tort system” really costs, here is the link. Go to page 19, Exhibit A.
2008 Insurance Receipts for malpractice = $11 billion
2008 Payouts for “torts” = $ 5 billion
Overall total health care costs
for 2008 from internet = $ 2.4 trillion
http://insurance-reform.org/TrueRiskF.pdf.
Do the math. Do it twice. Shake your head in disbelief.
Yep. that’s right. LESS THAN 1/2 PERCENT.
parsy, who is worn out trying to put this strawman down
You are totally ignoring the costs of extra treatments (just to be safe against lawsuits) and the costs of insurance to protect against lawsuits and the costs of those that have to work 'in the system' since they cannot afford the insurance to be independent. Please. It is not a strawman. If you are worn out trying to put this strawman down, perhaps it is because you are not working with a full deck.
I thought the word for multi-layered cake was “tart”. The German word is of course “Torte”. But I agree if one can find something as effective as “death panels” that would be great.
At least, not entirely.
Malpractice has wiped out entire sectors such as OB services in many area due to the shyrocketing cost of MedMal insurance in certain fields.
you can't deny it.- Just look in the yellow pages to see how many OBs are in your local area.
Then flip to the legal section to see how many attorneys there are.
When my wife delivered 2 children, we had to drive 45 miles for an Ob. - along the way, we passed over 2,000 legal offices.
And if it is correct that 70% of the neurosurgeons get sued once a year, then you have a BIG problem! What about recruitment? What about the costs for protecting themselves against frivolous suits? What about costs for unnecessary procedures - and no procedure is totally without risk!
I’ve know this has been a problem ever since I visited the US the first time. While riding the subway in NY I remember reading one of the ads: “Have you been to see your doctor recently. Contact us - we may help you to sue. Schyster & Schyster”.
I thought it was a joke. It wasn’t.
You need to count the number of extra procedures and tests done to avoid lawsuits, as well as the direct payments to legal insurance and legal vultures.
You also have to count the cost in lives of the procedures not done because the patient isn't already in pretty good health which makes the procedure risky.
And the cost in dollar and lives because of the vanishing specialists in certain areas like obstetrics and high risk surgery.
And you are missing the bigger point that all of those costs that you point to are based on the notion of rampant malpractice lawsuits. A notion that has no basis in fact.
While I don't agree with the new law here in TN for legal reasons, I think it is all that is needed to avoid "frivolous" claims. Before you can bring suit, you have to take the claim before a certification board that has to determine your claim has merit.
Under Obamacare, it will be ZERO percent. All doctors will be socialized and immune from lawsuits.
Now, what happens if democRATS control the "certification board"? Imagine a panel of Howard Deans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.