Is 'Tort Reform' really all the GOP has? I haven't seen anything else from them, have you?

by **fitche** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:05 pm

Americans for Insurance Reform, a project of Center for Justice & Democracy, has released a new study called True Risk: Medical Liability, Malpractice Insurance and Health Care.
It is co-written by actuary Robert Hunter, Director of Insurance for Consumer Federation of America, and former Federal Insurance Administrator and Texas Insurance Commissioner.

Its major findings are:

1. Medical malpractice premiums, inflation-adjusted, are nearly the lowest they have been in over 30 years.

2. Medical malpractice claims, inflation-adjusted, are dropping significantly, down 45 percent since 2000.

3. Medical malpractice premiums are less than one-half of one percent of the country"s overall health care costs; medical malpractice claims are a mere one-fifth of one percent of health care costs. In over 30 years, premiums and claims have never been greater than 1% of our nation"s health care costs.

4. Medical malpractice insurer profits are higher than the rest of the property casualty industry, which has been remarkably profitable over the last five years.

5. The periodic premium spikes that doctors experience, as they did from 2002 until 2005, are not related to claims but to the economic cycle of insurers and to drops in investment income.

6. Many states that have resisted enacting severe restrictions on injured patients" legal rights experienced rate changes (i.e., premium increases or decreases for doctors) similar to those states that enacted severe restrictions on patients" rights, i.e., there is no correlation between "tort reform" and insurance rates for doctors.

Another fart against the wind by the GOP?

by **jaren12** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:07 pm

Yes, it is, and it is ridiculous.

They know lawsuits are less than 1% of healthcare costs, it's been studied repeatedly.

They know that states that tried tort reform saw no difference, zero, in healthcare costs.

So they know it is useless, but they keep trying to push it to distract from any real reform that would actually make a difference.

by **roche** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:13 pm

it does not matter what we have.....you Dem's are in charge remember?
you can't blame it on us anymore

by **adelphos** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:15 pm

Yes I have seen other things. Like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foXQbmZxWYY

by **cinnard** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:23 pm

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970203946904574300041131468218.html

I just farted. Read the wall street more often, my friend.

How many Democrat Senators come from a Law background? How much money did Senator Edwards make from malpractice lawsuits? And that's just one man.

by **norwyn** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:28 pm

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970203946904574300041131468218.html

I just farted. Read the wall street more often, my friend.

How many Democrat Senators come from a Law background? How much money did Senator Edwards make from malpractice lawsuits? And that's just one man.

The GOP doesn't want to do anything about illegal immigration, Affirmative Action, unleashing the troops, nor cutting back on failed social programs.

Let the GOP fade away. Something else will take its place. Remember the Whigs?

by **demarco** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:35 pm

Doctors order countless unnecessary tests to protect themselves from potential lawsuits. Are you really OK with a person getting 25 million for malpractice and then another 25 million for pain and suffering?

BTW, Canada has a 100K cap on pain and suffering payments.

by **darik** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:41 pm

No tax increase for me, good

by **hillocke** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:52 pm

No tax increase for me, good

Funny that not one doctor that I know feels that malpractice insurance is a small part of their cost of doing business. Also underpayment by medicare and medicaid cause a cost shift and many prefer not to even take patients on those two. We have issues with cost and insurability of some pre-existing conditions and a few other things but NOTHING that calls for a new national program of any sort.
Just for giggles- maybe a PART of why medicine costs more here is that everywhere else has price caps and the pharms have to get their money back for R/D costs from somewhere

by **baigh75** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:01 pm

I work in healthcare, and it is often the doctors who do more "welfare" type of work that end up being sued repeatedly.

Our physicians who work at places that are in existence to treat the under-insured or non-insured are the ones who are sued over and over, often with ridiculous claims from people with their hands out just looking to get something for free...Of course, they are looking for something for free; that's what the government gives them over and over again. Let's force everyone onto government controlled (subsidized, if you want to be PC) health care coverage.

No thanks! I like my health care, and I will happily keep paying for it. I won't, however, pay for everyone else's.

Also, if malpractice insurance is so cheap, why does the federal government use free coverage as one of their main recruitment tactics for physicians? Any physician in the armed forces or VHA system does not have to pay for malpractice insurance. The federal government covers them for free. If the insurance is so cheap, why is this benefit so successful in the recruitment of physicians who are often paid much less than those who practice independently?

Advertisments:

Sponsor Links: