Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (3255)	7/9/2003 5:31:54 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793719

The Dems have the Environmental issue, the Repubs have the Lawyers Political Malpractice Trial lawyers ask Democrats to walk the plank--again. WSJ.com Wednesday, July 9, 2003 12:01 a.m. Democrats are expected to muster the 41 votes needed to kill medical liability reform in the Senate today, so why are Republicans smiling? Perhaps because they know they're teeing up what promises to be one of their better issues going into 2004. Democrats have long made the Senate the graveyard of any and all legal reform. The news is that they're having a harder time getting away with it. The scandal of asbestos litigation has forced them at least to bargain on that issue, while momentum is also building to limit class-action suits. It says something about Tom Daschle's devotion to the trial bar that he's willing to ask his Members to walk the plank even on medical liability, just as voters are discovering the damage it is doing to health care across the country. No fewer than 19 states are in "malpractice" crisis; Doctors have protested or walked out from Nevada to New Jersey, while pregnant women have had to cross state lines to find an obstetrician. One New Jersey doctor has held seminars to train toll-booth operators in emergency delivery, since more live births are likely to occur in transit to a distant hospital. Before Texas passed a recent reform, 14 of 17 medical insurers had left in the past two years. In Arkansas, doctors who treat nursing-home patients face a 1,000% premium increase on renewals. In West Virginia, trauma centers closed and doctors went on strike before Democratic Governor Bob Wise led a successful reform effort. Because they contribute to the practice of "defensive" medicine--or unnecessary procedures just to be sure--liability suits are also a major cause of rising health-care costs. All of this prompted the House to limit medical damages by a vote of 229-196 in March. But Senate Democrats continue to just say no. California's Dianne Feinstein dallied with support for a while, before the lawyers and Mr. Daschle yanked her back into line. The irony is that the proposed Senate bill is modeled after California's own successful 1975 reform that limited pain and suffering damages to $250,000. Victims of genuine malpractice still get compensated for economic harm, but they are no longer able to win the lottery of a huge jury award. In the past 25 years premiums across the U.S. have risen three times more than in California. Even if reform fails in Congress, the national battle has helped to trigger a wave of change in the states. Ten states have passed some liability reform in the past year, and another 17 have debated it. Nearly all of these reforms include some limit on non-economic damages, the kind that drive insurance rates out of sight and are unconnected to genuine harm. Don't Get Sick Here The American Medical Association says medical delivery in 19 states is in crisis: Arkansas New York Connecticut North Carolina Florida Ohio Georgia Oregon Illinois Pennsylvania Kentucky Texas Mississippi Washington Missouri West Virginia Nevada Wyoming New Jersey Still more state reforms are on tap this year. Florida Governor Jeb Bush is calling his legislature back for an unprecedented second session starting today to address the problem. Connecticut, where obstetricians will see an 85% increase in premiums for next year, may also have a special summer session. As federalists, we think this wave of state reform is probably better than a single national law. Unlike class actions, which damage commerce nationwide, medical liability affects health care in individual states. If a state's political-legal class is driving doctors away, then its voters can throw the political bums out. That may be what eventually happens in Missouri, for example, where Democratic Governor Bob Holden is promising to veto reforms passed by the GOP-run legislature. There's also a danger that a national reform might override even better state laws, such as California's. The argument for national reform is that the crisis is too acute to wait for 50-state trench warfare, especially against a trial bar grown so rich on tobacco and asbestos shakedowns that it can buy entire legislatures. Some states in crisis, notably Pennsylvania, also have constitutional obstacles to capping non-economic damages. And yet reform's recent success shows that it can be done. The vote in Congress will help this along by educating Americans about the problem and who refuses to solve it. Among Republicans, we'll be watching Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter in particular. He's typically a pal of the trial lawyers (his son is a medical liability lawyer), but he also faces a primary challenge next year from a reform proponent, Congressman Pat Toomey. But the main result of today's vote will be to get the Democrats on record for killing reform one more time. They will then have handed President Bush and most Republicans an issue that is both good policy and good politics for next year. In a debate between lawyers and patients, we know where the voters will come down. opinionjournal.com

To: Ilaine who wrote (3255)	7/9/2003 11:37:12 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793719

Re Medical Insurance...: Ah, but CB....I come from a position that the glass could be half full, not half empty. First of all, the drug prices in the US SHOULD be the same price they are in Canada, in Mexico, etc....Unless the drug companies explain how much those countries are subsidizing EACH of the drugs.... Especially the drugs that have been around from some time, and have the R&D costs out of them. The other thing re the cost of the insurance....Please note that I believe that what I'm talkiing about is the actual cost of the premium of the insurance........ Our government employees have MANY programs from which to choose...and many different types of coverage and benefits. I believe that IF the premiums for all Americans were the same as those for the government employees and the benefits were the same choices, we would all be better off. The insurance companies would have wide "risk pools". Everyone, no matter the income level would have to chose one plan. The government (taxpayers) would have to pay for the truly needy. Everyone would then have some sort of coverage. IF the average American paid the same premium cost as the US Congress and US Senate, we should all have the same type coverage. We taxpayers of course would have to pay our own premiums. The government employees would have the same arrangement they do now.... which seems to be the government subsidizes those premiums as part of the salary for the employee. One other thing.....I think you will find in many instances that the government jobs pay MUCH higher for the same type of background and experience than does private industry. Plus the government in general offers better benefits. This was true in most cases, when I checked as a recruiter. The only real differences were in the high tech arena....There are about 500 or so premium techies....and they command and usually get very high salaries. The rest of the folks in the tech areas especially, got a salary, and stock options....That is one of the reasons this bubble is so long lasting, IMO. There simply aren't enough new GROWTH industries...Capital is the only thing that will help to fund those new industries. The people with serious money have just been taken to the cleaners. So not much if any real movement yet. Other than around DC where the jobs seem pretty plentiful. Looks like the government is acting as a large "funder" to kickstart the economy.