"Yes, thank you. Right, Sarah Palin is like a stream of bat's piss."
"I, um, I, ah, I merely meant, Ms. Palin, that, ah, you shine out like a shaft of gold when all around is dark."
Posted on 08/21/2009 7:14:29 AM PDT by DogBarkTree
President Obama's health care "reform" plan has met with significant criticism across the country. Many Americans want change and reform in our current health care system. We recognize that while we have the greatest medical care in the world, there are major problems that we must face, especially in terms of reining in costs and allowing care to be affordable for all. However, as we have seen, current plans being pushed by the Democratic leadership represent change that may not be what we had in mind -- change which poses serious ethical concerns over the government having control over our families’ health care decisions. In addition, the current plans greatly increase costs of health care, while doing lip service toward controlling costs.
We need to address a REAL bipartisan reform proposition that will have REAL impacts on costs, and quality of patient care.
As Governor of Alaska, I learned a little bit about being a target for frivolous suits and complaints (Please, do I really need to footnote that?). I went my whole life without needing a lawyer on speed-dial, but all that changes when you become a target for opportunists and people with no scruples. Our nation’s health care providers have been the targets of similar opportunists for years, and they too have found themselves subjected to false, frivolous, and baseless claims. To quote a former president, “I feel your pain.”
So what can we do? First, we cannot have health care reform without tort reform. The two are intertwined. For example, one supposed justification for socialized medicine is the high cost of health care. As Dr. Scott Gottlieb recently noted, “If Mr. Obama is serious about lowering costs, he'll need to reform the economic structures in medicine—especially programs like Medicare.” [1] Two examples of these “economic structures” are high malpractice insurance premiums foisted on physicians (and ultimately passed on to consumers as “high health care costs”) and the billions wasted on defensive medicine.
Dr. Stuart Weinstein, with the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, recently explained the problem:
”The medical liability crisis has had many unintended consequences, most notably a decrease in access to care in a growing number of states and an increase in healthcare costs. Access is affected as physicians move their practices to states with lower liability rates and change their practice patterns to reduce or eliminate high-risk services. When one considers that half of all neurosurgeons—as well as one third of all orthopedic surgeons, one third of all emergency physicians, and one third of all trauma surgeons—are sued each year, is it any wonder that 70 percent of emergency departments are at risk because they lack available on-call specialist coverage?” [2]
Dr. Weinstein makes good points, points completely ignored by President Obama. Dr. Weinstein details the costs that our out-of-control tort system are causing the health care industry and notes research that “found that liability reforms could reduce defensive medicine practices, leading to a 5 percent to 9 percent reduction in medical expenditures without any effect on mortality or medical complications.” Dr. Weinstein writes:
“If the Kessler and McClellan estimates were applied to total U.S. healthcare spending in 2005, the defensive medicine costs would total between $100 billion and $178 billion per year. Add to this the cost of defending malpractice cases, paying compensation, and covering additional administrative costs (a total of $29.4 billion). Thus, the average American family pays an additional $1,700 to $2,000 per year in healthcare costs simply to cover the costs of defensive medicine. Excessive litigation and waste in the nation’s current tort system imposes an estimated yearly tort tax of $9,827 for a family of four and increases healthcare spending in the United States by $124 billion. How does this translate to individuals? The average obstetrician-gynecologist (OB-GYN) delivers 100 babies per year. If that OB-GYN must pay a medical liability premium of $200,000 each year (which is the rate in Florida), $2,000 of the delivery cost for each baby goes to pay the cost of the medical liability premium.” [3]
You would think that any effort to reform our health care system would include tort reform, especially if the stated purpose for Obama’s plan to nationalize our health care industry is the current high costs.
So I have new questions for the president: Why no legal reform? Why continue to encourage defensive medicine that wastes billions of dollars and does nothing for the patients? Do you want healthcare reform to benefit trial attorneys or patients?
Many states, including my own state of Alaska, have enacted caps on lawsuit awards against health care providers. Texas enacted caps and found that one county’s medical malpractice claims dropped 41 percent, and another study found a “55 percent decline” after reform measures were passed. [4] That’s one step in health care reform. Limiting lawyer contingency fees, as is done under the Federal Tort Claims Act, is another step. The State of Alaska pioneered the “loser pays” rule in the United States, which deters frivolous civil law suits by making the loser partially pay the winner’s legal bills. Preventing quack doctors from giving “expert” testimony in court against real doctors is another reform. Texas Gov. Rick Perry noted that, after his state enacted tort reform measures, the number of doctors applying to practice medicine in Texas “skyrocketed by 57 percent” and that the tort reforms “brought critical specialties to underserved areas.” These are real reforms that actually improve access to health care. [5]
Dr. Weinstein’s research shows that around $200 billion per year could be saved with legal reform. That’s real savings. That’s money that could be used to build roads, schools, or hospitals. If you want to save health care, let’s listen to our doctors too. There should be no health care reform without legal reform. There can be no true health care reform without legal reform.
- Sarah Palin
Palin may not have the command you desire over the topic, or been “fighting the fight” as long as DeMint, but she is the one we here on FR are and have been discussing, and she is the one being heard on the topic for the Conservative side by many others, The articles in front the the voters are Palin’s, not DeMints.
So who would be a head of whom?
The guy with the better grasp of the details or the person actually being listened to with equally valid if less detailed aruments by those who count, namely the voters? This thread alone demonstrates the results of that.
Thanks.
Tort reform is key, as well as reduction in government mandated coverage that insurance companies have to include in any policy.
Males, for example, should not have to pay for pregnancy coverage. We should also be able to chose from various menu items of coverage. Catastrophic coverage only, for example, should be an option if that is all we want to pay for!.
Perhaps it was meant that in the absence of other apparent leadership, Sarah speaking the truth is a “lightning bolt.”
OTOH, I don’t know why the State-Run Media would ever cover a conservative at all. So though they may be “shouting from the housetops” I would not hear it.
Bookmark for later read
Four points for healthcare reform:
Tort reform
deregulation of insurance sales
HSAs
catastrophic health insurance, subsidized if necessary
These four points would fix the problems. Notice it didn’t take 1000 pages. Also notice that these things are excluded or made illegal by HR3200.
Let me help you out, then. Poke Here for DeMint's Health Care Freedom Plan.
One of the stated goals of his plan is to "[reduce] predatory and frivolous malpractice lawsuits against physicians and hospitals."
You’re reaching farther back than you’re allowed.
What ... June 23 is "too far back?"
You’re gonna have to face it, that Palin is doing something that is much more effective and much more impacting than what others have only dreamed of doing.
She wrote a press release on FaceBook. Wow....
You don’t like Palin, and I understand that. But don’t let your dislike of Palin consume you.
Sigh.... what is it with you guys and your lachrymose suggestion that to disagree with Palin or her chances, is to "dislike" or "hate" her? You sound like a bunch of Oprah guests.
Palin is really an inspiration. I really hope she runs in 12’
And how many people are actually seeing DeMint’s stuff publicized everywhere?
Very few.
Palin’s got the megaphone and the platform to scream this issue. DeMint is a great guy, but he’s just does not have the mojo.
This facebook entry is getting press this weekend. DeMint’s plan is...well...not.
"Yes, thank you. Right, Sarah Palin is like a stream of bat's piss."
"I, um, I, ah, I merely meant, Ms. Palin, that, ah, you shine out like a shaft of gold when all around is dark."
@ Post #71: Palin’s point is that tort reform is not mentioned anywhere in Obamacare. How old the issue is, or what success other states, Congressional sessions, or presidential candidates have in implementing it, is completely irrelevant.
California has some of the lowest health insurance rates in the country.
It's a strawman. Palin's critics can't admit that, out of all the discussions on Obamacare, Palin is the first to openly question its omission.
Now if both were trees and both fell in the woods, which one would make a noise?
Given the fact that Palins efforts on this topic, as primitive as they maybe, are being discussed by thousands on facebook, many here and even picked up in the press and DeMints laudatory work is being picked up by....
Well...
You and a few others...
I wonder what that demonstrates...
Do you have a cite for the study? I hear statistics like that a lot but haven’t seen where they come from. Thanks.
On a sidenote, beware the underbelly of torm reform. It can lead to the lack of recovery for the old, infirm, and lower class. This is because the monetary incentive will not be in place to represent them in litigation. So in cases of true malpractice, which does happen far too often, they will be limited to the meager offerings of the insurance company.
All reform has its costs.
Sigh.... what is it with you guys and your lachrymose suggestion that to disagree with Palin or her chances, is to "dislike" or "hate" her? You sound like a bunch of Oprah guests.
Does not really jibe with this:
"Yes, thank you. Right, Sarah Palin is like a stream of bat's piss."
"I, um, I, ah, I merely meant, Ms. Palin, that, ah, you shine out like a shaft of gold when all around is dark."
True, but you said it had no traction before, which is demonstrably false.
LOL! No I didn't.
Sarah Plain was born before 1997?
“And we didn't need Sarah Palin to tell us that ... in fact, George Bush made it a central part of his presidential agenda. “
You and who exactly?
Your pals from Daily Kos?
She is not telling you anything.
She is sending a strong message to 0bama, asking the pertinent questions about 0bamacare and tort reform that people like RNC Chair Michael Steel should have been asking since this 0bamacar battle started, and still haven't.
“. It is based on ideology rather than facts, and that is why it should be opposed”
Nope.
0bamacare should be opposed from all angles,including tackling specific issues in the bill,tort reform etc, not just opposed based one ideology alone.
” Insurance itself tends to raise health care prices, in the form of increased overhead and reduction of market forces within the health care economy”
Insurance companies are in direct competition with each other, and would drive prices down if and when the frivolous lawsuits and outrageous awards are eliminated or brought down sharply.
As it is, health insurance costs are just going to keep going up, so long as ambulance chasers like John Edwards are given free reign to suck the blood of Americans every day, with gargantuan awards.
“. The problem is that folks hereabouts seem to think that Sarah Palin’s sudden arrival has transformed the battle; but it has not. She's late to the game, in fact.”
No one in this thread has made the claim that Sarah Palin invented the fight for tort reform. You made that claim yourself, then answered it.
But that doesn't change the fact, that she has focused attention on the tort reform aspect of healthcare, more than anyone else has in this current fight against 0bamacare.
Why else would most of the media be quoting her on tort reform right now?
And why is this thread heading to probably over 200 posts already? You wouldn't even be on this thread if she hadn't attacked 0bamcare on tort reform.
More than likely, we are gonna get some 0bama regime creature come out and respond to this latest salvo from her, as they have on every single issue she has raised about 0bamacre, which will spread the tort reform issue of 0bamare even more.
Remember the “death panel” article? It didn't even take a week for 0bama himself to try and defend himself against it, aided by a massive Palin attack from the 0bamabit media, which only helped spread the “death panel” description even more.
Try getting that kind of reaction from any of our so-called current Republican “leaders”.
Not sure about the 40%. Impossible to come to a conclusion what the overall drop was from the data reported in this.
http://www.msmec.com/mx/hm.asp?id=medmal
Funny. I don't see any "lack of disqualifications."
She ran a state, and would have continued had it not been for outsiders perverting state law trying to bring her down.
Served as Mayor. Served on a city council. Served as head of a energy commission before stepping down after seeing corruption.
My copy of the Constitution only says you have to be 35, natural born citizen, and lived in the U.S. for 14 years.
Where does it say she needs to serve two terms in an office and "brush up" on skills as required by intellectual elitists?
She is just not ready yet; and to pretend that she is ready, is not only a disservice to her, but also to conservatism as a whole.
Well, McCain picked her as VP. VP is next in line for Presidential succession. Did he make a mistake?
She was good enough for VP but not ready to be President?
Health Care Reform:
1) Tort reform
2) Eliminate barriers to competition across state lines
3) Give free health savings accounts to those truly in need
We’re done.
oh yeah, and
4) Reward productivity by cutting capital gains taxes, and you’ll have more tax revenue for #3.
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.