Posted On: October 7, 2004, 3:30 pm CDT

Posted By: Joe F. Rolando

Regarding Dr. Allan's comments:
Bush and Cheney claim they want to cap economic damages. Cheney said Kerry has voted 10 times against "medical liability reform."
Did it ever dawn on Bush and Kerry that maybe the reason Kerry voted that way was because the measure Bush and Cheney are proposing is so broad and impractical that it is virtually unconstitutional? Kerry is a lawyer. Bush and Cheny are not.
Bush and Cheney think they have the right to cap everyone's settlement regardless of the circumstances of their medical liability case. In otherwords, all people can sue, but their settlements can't be too high. What incentive does this give doctors to
take their professionalism more serious and lawyers to not encourage their clients to sue?
Who will decide the cap? Bush and Cheney, neither of them with any legal practice training or education in the law -- or medicine. The two have an "either or" mentality. They either do something drastic or nothing at all. They don't like consensus with the medical community or the legal community.
If settlements are capped on medical liability suits why shouldn't they be capped on ALL liability settlements - regardless of how they adversely affect people. This means the concept of gross negligence also will "capped" or virtually a joke.
The government wants to tell us it is okay to sue - but not too much??? This is not the Republican Party way. The party is supposed to let the free market prevail.
Kerry and Edwards' plan at least makes it encumbent upon the legal profession and other "independent experts- doctors included" to review the cases before they can go forward. Independent experts will weigh each case on medical practice and legal merits not restrict how much money one can receive. If Bush and Cheney have their way there will still be just as many lawsuits - if not more - than there are today. With Kerry and Edwards, legal appropriateness of the case will be handled BEFORE the trial starts.