EQUALIZING THE PLAYING FIELD ON TORT REFORM

[MattinNJ]

Thank you. You would think that someone in charge would have bothered to read "Wealth of Nations". As a bonus, they could also read some of the Founding Fathers writings on the size of Government and how they relied heavily on Smiths teachings.

I can understand a democrat who are marxists and would rather rip their eyes out then read a book on free markets and capitalism. There is no excuse for a conservative not to know it chapter and verse.

[RJCogburn]

Wrong.

One problem is that while you say 'tort reform' you limit it to medical issues...though I understand that's what GWB did.

The problem is so much larger. It is that we have become such a litigious society as GWB said. The problem extends far beyond medical issues and a much wider answer is needed but will not come I fear until societal views change.

Having said that, if I were to choose a single cause for the problem it is simple.....WAY too many attorneys and more being cranked out all the time. While there are certainly some elite schools there are also some low level ones such that if one can read and write and has a bit of brains one can become an attorney.

All these zillions of attorneys want to make a living and are out there constantly looking for new things to litigate.

Check out the yellow pages of your phone book. You will see, I'll bet, a whole lot of big ads for attorneys...full page ads one after the other, maybe even some double full page ads. More than any other profession by far and more than any business except maybe autos.

[wjcsux]

Lawyers normally get 30-40% off the top of any settlements. It certainly is about greed! Look in any phone book of any city. You will see full page ads for medical malpractice attorneys.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Sure they worry about that. So do the docs (very few of whom are selfless altruists) and anyone who works in insurance.

Government needs to step out.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Lots and lots of docs in the yellow pages, too. Making very nice livings, and in the top 2% net earners in the country.

Do I need to mention what insurance execs earn?

[RJCogburn]

Lots and lots of docs in the yellow pages, too.

Yup. Count up their ads, check the sizes and compare to the attorneys. Then get back to me.

[wjcsux]

Doctors save lives, Attorneys take advantage, and make huge profits on people's suffering. Insurance is one of those necessary evils of today's society. Unfortunately, life isn't risk free.

[Larry Lucido]

The real solution is to eliminate the government from the health field alltogether and let Adam Smith's invisible hand cure everything.

I agree with eliminating government from the health field altogether. I would be interested in having you elaborate on how this would affect the problem of high malpractice premiums, without otherwise reforming the judicial process.

Just IMO, caps on certain categories of awards do not constitute government interference in private contracts. Instead, I see them as a restriction on government taking (juries act on behalf of the judiciary when setting awards).

Perhaps patients should be free to voluntarily limit damages in return for lower fees? Those who don't wish to limit damages can pay a surcharge that reflects the physician's extra malpractice insurance costs.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Unfortunately, life isn't risk free.

Once this set of caps is in place, it will be for docs. They won't even have to worry about being careful, payment for their services for the elderly is covered via medicaid and medicare, payment for nearly everyone else is covered by insurance which asks few probing questions, and socialist shills want to expand coverage even further, going damn near toward universality.

They're insulated from all economic risk by government.

How socialist is that?

[american spirit]

Add to your observations the fact that our society has been inundated with literally millions of codes, statutes, regulations, etc. which were created with the intention to provide a consistent revenue stream from the sheeple as well as a steady source of clients for those attorneys equipped to "interpret the (alleged) law". Codes and regulations are not true law and most of these city hall Nazi's could be shut down quickly if noticed properly. It's critical to our collective futures that we all begin to seek a greater awareness of the relationship we have with gov't. entities and their apparent assumption that we are a nation of incompetents in need of of increased gov't. control over our lives.

[RJCogburn]

I agree with your observations.

I would shorthand it by suggesting that attorneys promote the writing of complicated laws and then hire themselves out to interpret their meaning.

[american spirit]

Bingo. Let me tell you this....there is a growing movement in the country that is uncovering more knowledge every day concerning this subject. The key to this is understanding "law merchants" or "the law of contracts" and how we unknowingly bind ourselves into contracts with various entities thereby giving them jurisdiction over our affairs. Almost all of our affairs are conducted "in commerce" and regulated by all these codes, reg's, permits, etc. hence the need for legal representation to interpret all these laws for us incompetents.

[OccamsRazor]

I'll posit the following: 1. Malpractice claims overwhelmingly involve only 2% of the doctors - the same doctors that the profession won't police.

This is *FALSE*. Get your facts straight before you post straw-man arguments based upon blatantly false data.

Need some help? Try here, for example:

http://www.tsbme.state.tx.us/statistics/pls2002.pdf

From the last page:

Total number of physicians (MD and DO) with active license status and a practice address in TX: 38,093 Total number of the above physicians with one or more claims: 19,388 (50.90%)

[pdlglm]

1. Malpractice claims overwhelmingly involve only 2% of the doctors - the same doctors that the profession won't police.

This is just flat wrong. Ether that or I manage to represent every bad doctor in my region. I am general counsel for any number of clinics ( I don't do med mal defense, though I have a partner that does )and the percentage in our area is much higher than this.

2. A claimant can't even bring a claim unless a doctor has rendered an opinion that there was malpractice.

Also incorrect. Of course bringing a claim and keeping it from being dismissed are different things. However, in my jurisdiction, TN, while expert testimony is required to prove that that doc fell below the local standard of care, the plaintiff's industry can find a doctor to say anything they want for any case they have... for a fee. Finding testimony to keep your case alive is not a problem. But this to a great extent misses the point. The defense lawyer may get a frivolous case dismissed, but the defense costs have still been incurred and there is no real remedy against the plaintiff or the lawyer for filing frivolous suits.

3 That lawyer on the contingency spends many thousands of dollars out of his own pocket before seeing dollar one - frequently, only after appeals have been exhausted. The defense lawyer, on the other hand, has been paid handsomely from moment one. And if the plaintiff loses, not only does the lawyer get paid nothing, he's much poorer out of pocket.

There is some truth to this. While the client is technically responsible for expenses (don't think for a second that they don't come off the top along with the fee before the client sees a dime) many don't have the resources to pay them and the lawyer is left holding the bag. Perhaps this is why many PI lawyers don't actually try cases for the most part. They try and settle them, and fast, so as to get the money in with as little risk as possible.

Ever hear those ambulance chaser ads that have a "client" come on and say that the insurance company was jerking them around and then they hired the lawyer and they got their check in a couple of weeks. What they don't say is that they got their check in a couple of weeks because their lawyer settled their case for fifty cents on the dollar.

4. American courts don't award legal fees to the winner in negligence cases - so that plaintiff who wins nothing but compensatory damages loses a sizable amount out of pocket in the long run only to get partially reimbursed.

American courts also don't force a plaintiff who brings a frivolous suit to pay the fees of the defense. Give the defense a modified, enforced rule 11 type remedy from frivolous lawsuits and perhaps the local PI firms will stop trolling for nursing home suits on my local tv station. (Reduced legal advertising would also have a positive affect on the tort reform issue).

I agree that there are many facets to the problems facing our health care industry and that most of them are caused by government control of the system. However, the tort system is also part of the problem and while tort reform may only be treating the "symptoms" of a system that needs a drastic overhaul, it is better than nothing (and much more likely to happen than said overhaul).