Our health care industry is SO litigious, patients are forced to endure and finance needless procedures, tests and operations in fear of trial lawyers and run-away juries. The cost for malpractice insurance is passed onto the consumer, the cost for jury awards is passed onto the consumer too!
Why not have caps and limits to curb excessive awards that ultimately get passed onto the consumer.
I have never heard & never will hear a liberal present a genuine reason why tort reform (reasonable caps and limits) should not be implemented. Methinks the cost of health care is not really the issue, giving government control (socialism) is the real agenda.
Why not tort reform, reasonable limits on jury awards and excessive frivolous law suits?
Bobbi- trial lawyers take 35% – 40% of the awards, they initiate dozens of suits, hoping one or two will pay off “lottery” winnings. Every country except the USA, uses the English rule, where the loser of the suit pays the winner for their legal expenses!
Reasonable jury awards means no awards for 20 million dollars for an injury, where the lawyer takes 8 million.
Jerome
Theresa
Tort reform would save 3 billion dollars. That’s a drop in a bucket.
Besides, if some incompetent quack cut you open and took out the wrong kidney, would you be satisfied with $250,000? I know I wouldn’t.
Charles
Even the CBO admitted that tort reform would only lower premiums by 2% at most.
Megan
Because the trial lawyers lobby is one of the biggest supporters of the DNC and Obama. Pretty simple answer isn’t it?
Micheal
They have talked about it.
Tort reform covers a lot less people (and would actually force people to lose their insurance) and costs twice as much. also, malpractice suits only account for 1% of the total cost of healthcare
Gene
Because liberals don’t have common sense. Any idiot knows that tort reform, along with allowing insurance agencies to cross over state lines, will help lower costs.
Jamie
Listen up. This is being talked about. It’s becoming part of the health care plan.
Lydia
This was a big deal under Bush. He could not get far with it because of the lobby of lawyers and liberals. Liberals are generally against it and we have a liberal administration so that is why.
Jerry
Excessive awards? What is excessive when your child is given the wrong drug, and is maimed for LIFE. These awards cost less than 2% of the medical costs. Yet, how about the AMA policing ‘their own’ and getting rid of bad doctors. Currently, a bad doc can hop from state to state w/o too much fear of losing his license. These bad docs count for most of the lawsuits. Get rid of the bad docs! And for real financial savings, end ‘per service’ billing. The cost is a nightmare to bill for every aspirin, and wrought with errors. Bill ‘per procedure’ and costs will go down and quality will go up.
Dan
Because TORT reform has not worked in Texas and will do nothing to address the way the insurance companies use death panels to deny care.
Why does no other developed nation have the US model of healthcare? Because in the US model, insurance companies use death panels to deny care to those they are meant to cover. And then they raise costs [1]. Not only does the USA spend more on healthcare than any other nation [2], it finds itself bottom of the table when it comes to preventable deaths due to treatable conditions when it comes to developed nations [3]. The sad thing is that rather than focus on these things, the right spreads lies and half truths about the reforms and how healthcare works abroad [4]. But, if you think that my points are wrong, e-mail me with proof.