Why do libs say nothing about tort reform, if they claim to care about health care cost?

[matchitisiw]

Why not pick some low hanging fruit, how about reasonable limits on jury awards for medical law suits?

If you really care about health care costs, consider the all the costs passed onto the medical consumer due to trial lawyers and fear of litigation:

1) the cost of unnecessary tests, procedures and operations patients
are forced to endure and finance, for fear of lawsuits.
2) the "run-away" jury awards, which trial lawyers take 35% - 40%
3) all the frivolous law suits- trial lawyers initiate 20 suits, hoping just
one pays off where they can be compensated $10,000 per hour for
the time they spent on the case.
4) the high cost of malpractice insurance, all health care providers
and doctors have to pay for and then pass the cost back to the
consumer.
5) America is by far the most litigous country in the world because
we are the only country where the plaintiff has no financial
obligation to the defendant for the cost to defend frivolous law
suits.

All these costs are passed onto the consumer, exponentially increasing the cost of health care.

Whatever you think of insurance companies, drug companies and capitalism, there is no argunment to oppose reasonable limits and caps on jury awards and judgements IF you care about the cost of health care.

Why do liberals stand against reasonable caps and limits on law suits?

If you oppose tort reform isn't it obvious its really just about breaking the back of the health care industry to achieve socilaized medicine?

[eadweald71]

Very simple. Most members of congress are LAWYERS. Why would they even suggest a bill that would limit their pay? In this country, we only limit the pay of CEO's... NOT trial attorneys.

[drystan]

Very simple. Most members of congress are LAWYERS. Why would they even suggest a bill that would limit their pay? In this country, we only limit the pay of CEO's... NOT trial attorneys.

Because it doesn't lower health care costs. Missouri, Texas and other states have strong tort settlement caps in place. Their costs are going up just as much as the rest of the country.

[salvadore94]

The only figure I have heard on the cost of the current tort system as it applies to health care is $30 billion per year.

It's about government control, no costs. Libs just want to have the power to tell everyone what to do.

[calin]

Health care reform is not being proposed. Focus is on mandating insurance to those that dont currently have it, whether they want it or not. No efforts at this time to control costs.

[doran]

They are on the side of trial lawyers and they say the costs are insignificant.

When in fact malpractice costs are about 150 billion a year.

[jomei69]

I am a liberal and I understand than tort reform should be an integral part of health care reform. The problem is that the ones who don't believe it is a problem are lawyers and therefore do not see it is a problem.

[dodya]

Because their media sources have conveniently failed to bring it to their attention. Or, if it has been brought up, they have downplayed the monetary impact that the lack of tort reform has on our healthcare system.

There are 2 streams of media going on in this country. If you focus all your attention on one (liberal or conservative) then the other one seems like Greek. We are arguing over issues from two entirely different persepectives that seem to have no concept of the other.

[tredway]

Good post.

I would also like to see them cut most of the costly government regulations that add unnecessary expenses and paperwork to our system. But yes, litigation reduction would be #1.

[lundie]

In some states where there has been some tort reform there has been no measurable reduction in medical costs. So although there appears to be some logic behind the idea of tort reform to control medical costs, the empirical evidence does not support it.

Of course tort reform would not be necessary if juries would stop issuing outrageous awards.