Skip to main content

A Good Idea From the Right

      It appears that the Pelosi/Reid healthcare reform legislation has gone down in flames. I have not included Obama among the drivers because it doesn’t appear that he had much to say about it, apparently by his own choice. It still seems ridiculous that one can have a 59 to 41 majority in any organization, and still not be able to get anything passed.
      Unfortunately, this is not football; one cannot just drop back and punt. But what can one do? The Republicans have some suggestions, some of which are good ones; others may need further study.
      Tort reform is at the top of the Republicans' list. Insofar as it concerns healthcare, I think it is an idea that needs to be considered. But what is it?
      Without realizing it, most of us are ambivalent in our understanding of tort reform. On the one hand we believe tort reform is the effort to “reform” lawsuits so as to prevent “runaway verdicts” that range into the millions of dollars. Usually large corporations are an exception, particularly those in “harmful” industries such as cigarettes or asbestos, or “greedy” corporations such as Enron, Worldcom et al.
      At the same time, most of us have a concern for the underdog; if a plaintiff shows up wearing bandages and is unable to walk, we want to punish the scalawag who is responsible for his being in that condition.
      There is some question as to how much of an increase in overall medical costs is caused by malpractice claims. Most studies have found it to be less than 2% of the total, however they have not taken into consideration the cost of preventive medicine which physicians are almost compelled to perform in order to avoid litigation. With that thrown into the mix, I believe that capping the jury awards for pain and suffering would be a good idea. An injury does not hurt any less if the injured party has received five million dollars than it does if he has received one million dollars.
      In any event, there is one component of tort law that I think definitely needs to be changed: the awarding of punitive damages to the plaintiff. While I agree that some defendants deserve to be punished, I think it should be in the nature of a fine by the state.
      There is a specific problem with tort reform as it applies to healthcare: Republicans generally think of such legislation as applying to all torts, not just medical malpractice. Do they really think that Enron and Worldcom should have got off with a slap on the wrist?
      Even if the parties can get together on medical tort reform, I doubt that it would pass constitutional muster, at least at the present time. As currently comprised, the Supreme Court considers that corporations are the same as natural persons. Would the court allow Congress to pass a law that says human persons enjoy a privilege that unhuman persons do not have? I doubt it, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be considered.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

There Are Only Seven Jokes - Introduction

      The statement “There are only seven jokes – all the rest are variations,” has been around for a long time, but no one ever seems to know what the original seven are. I think I have found the solution to the mystery.       The answer is to be found in an article published in the New York Times on May 2, 1909. Entitled “New Jokes? There Are No New Jokes, There Is Only One Joke,” it goes on to say that all jokes are a distortion, and lists seven categories of distortion. Supposedly every joke will fit into one of the categories. I believe that repetition changed the seven categories into the seven jokes.       Each of my next seven blogs will be devoted to exploring one of the categories. In addition, I shall attempt to give an example or two of jokes which I think fit the category.       You must realize that this article appeared over one hundred years ago, so most of the jokes appearing therein are so out-of-date that modern readers wouldn’t even understand them. For example,

By Today’s Standards Many of my Teachers Would be in Jail

I started school in a two-room building: grades 1 to 4 in one room; grades 5 to 8 in the other. One teacher in each room taught all four grades. I don’t remember first grade very well – the teacher left at the end of the year. I am pretty sure it was not my fault. Now keep in mind that reading the Bible every morning was the standard for all grades at that time. But my teacher in grades two to four went a little above and beyond the normal practice. As a member of a “plain” sect, she considered it her duty to lead the little heathens to Christianity. She offered a free Bible to all students who managed to memorize 20 verses. I memorized my verses – “Jesus saves” was my favorite because it was the shortest – and got my Bible with my twenty underlined in red. That would be illegal today (not the underlining), and rightly so. Teachers may not teach religion, although contrary to what many folks seem to think, students may bring their Bibles to school, read them, and pray their
The National Anthem I have a somewhat minor pet peeve. I say minor because in the grand scheme of things neither I nor society will do anything substantive about it, so my best bet is probably to suck it up and move on. Perhaps after writing about it I can lay it to rest. It came up recently while I was working out at our Wellness Center. A program on television was playing America The Beautiful , and I remarked to a lady I have known for 40 years that I thought that should be the National Anthem instead of The Star Spangled Banner. She replied, rather huffily, I thought, “Some people think God Bless America should be the national anthem.” At that point I decided, wisely, I think, to back off before an argument sprang up. Now I realize that The Star Spangled Banner is a very nice, patriotic song, but an anthem it is not. According to Wikipedia, “ An anthem is a  musical composition  of celebration, usually used as a symbol for a distinct group, particularly the  nationa