I mentioned the notions of distractions a couple of times and encouraged "the people" to keep their focus on what's important.
One item that I think is important to watch is the process and positions on the Patient's Rights Bill.
I'll digress back to the early 1800s for a bit, which turns out to be very relevent to the issue and an aspect of freedom that IS important.
In the very early 1800s civil litigation on a per capita basis was higher than it is today. If you delve into the old articles of the time, you'll see the same sorts of complaints that you here today, packed court dockets, frivolous suits, scurolous lawyers, etc. All the same. In response, the same solutions were bantored about, limited liability, limited lawyer fees, etc. If it wasn't for the writing style of the 1800s, you would swear you were reading today's newspaper. [Keeping in mind that the members of Congress and the Administration included the Framers.]
So what did they do? Like all good Congresses they formed a committee to study the problem. They toured Europe to review and assess the civil litigation courts and processes in Europe. At the end of the study, they concluded to leave the system as it was, in spite of it's flaws.
Odd. To leave this flawed system as it was. The sole reason was that this civil litigation system that we have in the US is unique in that it was the only system that allows access to the courts by the common man. That's important. That's one of the aspects of this government that sets itself apart from the rest of the world, an aspect of freedom that is difficult to quantify but none the less important.
So I watch very closely who it is that wants to take away this unique quality of our freedom.
jttmab |
