If Fred Thompson’s principled position in voting against tort reform is that he believes individual states should generate their own tort reforms, he’s either in bed with the trial lawyers or incompetent.
Lawyers have gone jurisdiction shopping for decade upon decade. “You can’t sue them in 49 states? Why, there’s always South Carolina!”
Tort reform absolutely has to occur on a national level for it to be effective. Individual states can make regulations tougher than federal restrictions, but until we have control at the federal level, we’re going to continue to see these ridiculous lawsuits.
Thompson has made several boneheaded stands/votes based on federalism. His Pro-Choice stance in 1994 was based on federalism/libertarianism.
What’s not to like about Thompson? I don’t think he’s invested the energy in this campaign that anyone looking to become the Ruler of the0 Free World should. I think he’s very vulnerable to comparisons with George Bush. I think he’s haggard and thus vulnerable to a younger, more vital DNC group of candidates. I’ve also been very unimpressed with him in several interviews. I’m not particularly impressed with his business credentials, either.
That said, I like Thompson’s folksy mannerisms, his frank way of dealing with adversity, his generally conservative record, and his promises to cut spending. He does manage to garner up a great deal of support and inspire the base (or at least some of it). I like the guy. I just don’t like him as chief executive.
Tell me, for example, on tort reform why it is appropriate to have a federally mandated medical malpractice cap that is the same for Mississippi and New York, in spite of the different costs of living. Is this something the federal government should be sticking its nose into?
When you talk about tort reform, you must be talking about products liability. Or are you saying there should be comprehensive federal workers compensation regulation. The devil is in the details. I am in favor of tort reform, but I do not believe in giving anyone, including businesses and corporations, a blank check that is issued from Washington. This is dangerous and it is the easy way for business to solve issues, but it fails to address the particular needs of local jurisdictions. Aside from the military, the federal government has demonstrated no such competence. BTW, can you point me to something in the Constitution’s grant of enumerated powers to the federal government that gives it the right to invade what has been a state province for 200 years.
The fact is that most tort reform, like most good legislation, is best accomplished not by Washington but at the state level, through selection of good state judges and legislation passed by the state legislatures.
As far as George Bush is concerned, there is no comparison between him and Thompson. Thompson is a federalist , and I do not believe that Bush ever even pretended to be one. His expansion of the federal government, No Child Left Behind, Prescription drug benefits, excessive federal spending, no vetoes (other than stem cell research) in over 6 years sets him far apart form Thompson.
I am just going to disagree with you on the “haggard” look. That is your opinion not shared by many. And who is this group of “more vital” DNC candidates. Mondale was less haggard and more vital than Reagan, and he lost 49 states. So was Carter, and he lost 44 states.
I think that his interviews have ranged from above average to outstanding. And I have no idea what you mean about his businsess credentials.