Posted on 10/09/2004 3:42:17 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
A new wave of Republican attack ads is coming this week, but this time their target is the No. 2 man on the Democratic ticket, John Edwards. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the November Fund, a new 527 group dedicated to attacking Edwards, a former plaintiffs' lawyer, and "lawsuit abuse," will this week launch an ad campaign that portrays him as a cause of the crisis in the medical system. "Doctors are leaving, hospitals are closing, health care costs are skyrocketing at an alarming rate," says one direct-mail piece. "Tell Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards that it is time to support common sense lawsuit abuse reform." The Chamber is focusing on eight battleground states with a "very aggressive mail, phone and internet campaign," says its national political director Bill Miller. The campaign is aimed at independent women with children, who are presumed to be more receptive to health care issues. Miller declined to say how much it will spend other than "in the millions."
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
I strongly suspect that in the last three weeks of the campaign, Kerry et. al. will, ironically enough, find themselves on the defensive on, of all things, domestic policy. I envision groups like the Club for Growth running ads threatening that a vote for Kerry is a vote for tax hikes, like the AMA running ads threatening that a vote for Kerry is a vote to strip the elderly of choice in medical care, like the energy companies running ads threatening a vote for Kerry is a vote for so-called 'envirnonmental policies' which will drive up oil costs and make us more dependent on Mid-east oil.
I'm not saying these are the exact ads which will air in battleground states, I'm just saying these are the types of ads we should expect to see.
I sort of war gamed this out with a friend last summer. Wait until the closing weeks of the campaign, keep the focus on foreign policy until then, and then unload on Kerry's Senate record in the final weeks as the undecideds are paying attention so that Kerry can't say, "Hey, that's old news."
Basically, the idea is to hit Kerry-Edwards from a variety of different directions, preempting their ability to develop a clear theme in the closing weeks. When I saw 'shock and awe' used recently, I thought this might be exactly what was coming. Now, with this launch against Edwards and the debates this last week, I'm almost sure of it. Look for Bush to win the third debate, hands down.
Do the Swiftvets have any more ammunition or have they just about done all the damage they can do?
They've pretty much played their role, keeping Kerry distracted from July through September. Interestingly, I don't think I've ever witnessed a presidential election in which I have seen a candidate who has spent less time and effort defining himself for the voters than Kerry has.(Maybe Dole in 1996?) What this means is, its early October, and most people still don't know who Kerry is. This gives the Bush camp the opportunity to define him as he really is -i.e. a Massachusettes liberal.
Show how deep their denial is -- or how shallow they truly are.
At least O'l Ted Kennedy gave us the HMO act of 1974, which launched low cost non-insurance healthcare! Which by the way, HMO's are not insurance companies. Congress via Kennedy's act exempt HMO's from insurance laws.
1% my arse!! In my immediate family there are three DO's and a Chiropractor. I chose to be really greedy and am in oil and gas. Anywho, their malpractice insurance has reached levels that drove my father-in-law into retirement and leaves the rest enough to barely cover their enormous student loans. They are good people who care for the sick as opposed to the scumbag trial lawyers who live all around me. They circle disaster like a gull follows a shrimp boat. They are low-life bastards who prey on the misfortune of others. One such a-hole lives a block from me. He's a total moron but he caught a judgement about four years ago and lives to this day off it. The only thing a communist ever said that I agree with is: "First KILL all lawyers!"
bump
I have noticed that the vast majority of women that I know are having C-sections these days. I seriously doubt that there are so many "high risk" pregnancies that require intervention unless the OB's are afraid of a lawsuit if something goes wrong.
Where can I find the quote "The first thing to do is to kill all the lawyers."?
The passage comes from the second part of King Henry VI (Act IV, Scene II). This was an actual suggestion proposed by Wat Tyler in the earlier rebellion of 1381.
"Yeah, but John Kerry and John Edwards say that only accounts for 1% of the problem. They wouldn't lie to us, right?"
They use misleading statistics. (I know, you're shocked, right?)
The 1% or so figure is as a percentage of the total cost of health care.
Not a big percentage.
What it IS a big percentage of is the cost of medical malpractice insurance - big enough to force doctors out of practice or to go without insurance... meaning they could lose everything they've worked for to a lawsuit.
>> Malpractice insurance for an OB/GYN runs something like $100k/year. An office might gross something $1-2 million/year, in which case malpractice insurance premiums account for 5-10% of the overhead costs. <<
... and how much is it if you've had a judgement against you? Keep in mind that a doctor doesn't need to have done anything wrong to have a judgement go aganst him/her. Down syndrome babies come to mind...
"So while it's a lot, malpractice probably isn't the main cost driver in medical care. There are two things that probably drive costs a lot harder: new technology (equipment and drugs), and government involvement via Medicade and Medicare."
The Dems use apples/oranges.
It's not a big percent of overall health care costs - it's a big percent of medical malpractice costs, driving docs out of biz or making them refuse high risk patients.
Malpractice adds a lot of indirect costs.
I had a kidney stone removed last summer, and I had to go to the hospital beforehand for blood work, chest x-ray, and electrocardiogram. By happenstance I had just had bloodwork and a heart stress test about ten days earlier, but the doctor said I needed to do it again. These kinds of extra tests are almost purely done on the advice of lawyers, to protect against lawsuits.
Same with gynecologists. They do a lot of extra tests on the mother, most of them unnecessary, to protect against law suits.
Oh those Wasckally Wepublicans and their attack ads!
LOLOL
hehehehe
We were seeing a reproductive endocrinologist who lobbied for tort reform in Texas in 2003...jury award cap. He told us that his insurance (which had tripled in one year to a whopping $300,000!) was rebated to him after the legislation passed in Texas, and he was able to hire three more receptionist types, which were desperately needed.
I think thats part right, but I got a feeling there will be an "october surprise" involving Kerry's past.
You remember Bush's DWI coming out last year, I have a gut feeling there is something similiar in Kerry's past. Kerry never was (and still hasn't been)properly vetted by his staff. Generally, you do opposition research on your canidate to find absolutley everything, this way you can be nimble, disiplined, and know how to respond and get everything out early so not to do harm later.
Kerry's campaign hasn't done that, and can't (kerry apparently won't let them, which is why the SBV's were so devestating, and kerry's folks didn't know how to respond or what hit them). In Kerry's 20 years in the senate, and also as a prosecutor, luietant governor, there's got to be something being kept under wraps which will come out at the last moment to bury him.
This coupled with a barrage of ads defining kerry as the second coming of mondale, carter, and McGovern, will hurt not only kerry but depress part of his base and hurt other dems too.
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.