The President is “serious” now. He really means it this time. He isn’t joking, he wants to control costs and not just insurance premiums.
Does anyone believe this guy, a guy who has the thinest of resumes of any former President, one who surrounds himself with the least amount of people in his cabinet in history who have any practical business experience. A man skilled in politics by the Chicago political mob. Give me a break.
The posts here are something else. This is an overdue step way in the right direction. This issue has been heavily on the minds of Obama’s critics (Today’s posts?). Yet, here he is taking his first shot at Tort Reform and you guys are criticizing him?
The criticism is warranted as this is a Pres that is practiced in the art of rhetoric and simply says things for effect with no intention of following through. Actions speaks louder than words and his actions, when placed against the mirror of his rhetoric, makes these type of observations spot on.
Before you act, you have to talk about it. You gave no example of his not following through on said rhetoric. You prove my point that anything this prez will do will be subject to your criticism. This latest Rhetoric, as you call it, is actually and act of “following through” on the plan to give states grants to tackle tort reform. It’s in the health care reform act.
It’s also a Repbublican idea. Good for him for reaching across the aisle and proposing something as sensible as Tort Reform.
Read up on it, bro instead of blindly criticizing his every act. States should have the right to manage Tort reform. This is an example of Obama’s NOT using the Fed to rule from above except for providing money for states with thin budgets to improve their tort system.
•Advances medical liability reform through grants to States: Provides grants to States to jump-start and evaluate promising medical liability reform ideas to put patient safety first, prevent medical errors, and reduce liability premiums.
◦(Sources: S. 1783, “Ten Steps to Transform Health Care in America Act” (Enzi bill); H.R. 3400, “Empowering Patients First Act” (Republican Study Committee bill); H.R. 4529, “Roadmap for America’s Future Act” (Ryan bill); S. 1099, “Patients’ Choice Act” (Burr-Coburn, Ryan-Nunes bill))
Ok….I gave you an example from the bill that refers to
providing money to states so they can get started on medical
torm reform. I pasted it into my post.
Your oil example is rediculous given that the energy policies
under the old administration were gutted which allowed the BP
oil spill to happen. A temporary ban on Gulf oil drilling
had to happen. There was no choice.
The ruination of parisanship and civility was not Obama’s
doing. Obama was the one who held a question and answer
session with a Republican only group of legislators.
It was televised. Can you imagine Bush II doing that with the opposition??
It was a Republican Congressman who yelled “you lie”
during last year’s state-of-the-union. Would you call
civil? You are grasping at straws dude.
February 21, 2011 at 3:45 pm
Tom says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
D, money to the states for med mal reform. Med Mal, as is insurance, is a State issue, not a Federal issue, so he gets no points for that.
Oil spill, you need to think about who controlled the inspection process just prior to the failure and you also need to do some research on the concept of “regulatory capture”.
The Blair House meeting was simply a photo-op as Pres O went on to pass this mess without support from Repubs or the American People, so, again, you score no points with your point.
As for the canard of “civlity” by this Pres, let’s look at the cause of the “Beer Summit”, the you bring a knife, I bring a gun quote, the “punish our enemy” comment to a Latino group, and now the “seems like union busting” comment to the current state of affairs in Wisc where he attempts to insinuate himself into a State issue.
By the way, there are literally thousands of other wells in the Gulf that have operated for years without incident, so there was a choice, one which has rational math behind it, not just political point scoring as its goal.
Tom, your post makes the most sense. Now that we have no discernible energy policy other than making solar panels and wind turbines (by GE), we are most vulnerable to the tribulations of the Middle East. We will see $4 gas before summer and we are not drilling or building nuclear plants. EPA is still trying to impose CAP & Trade which will only hurt the economy more with layoffs. If they really wanted to create jobs, turn the energy industry loose and let them develop it. We have more than enough energy supplies in this country.
A panel of expert (judges) to review and decide on a medical case is the only way to be fair. This rule of being judged by your peers doesn’t work any longer in the complex manner of providing health care. The crying mother, or sobbing grandma doesn’t mean that the doctor was negligent yet that is the only part the jury seems to grasp. Let’s get real, punish those that were negligent and let the other 99.99% of the medical health profession do their job without the fear of becoming a lotto ticket for some sad family.
What no one seems to address in this climate of medical malpractice tort reform is that to even get to the point where your case is heard before a judge or even a full trial requires in most states that the merits of the case be review by a panel of the doctor’s peers. That’s right, other physicians and nurses are placed on a panel to review the case – meaning only cases that have REAL merit ever make it to the point of being heard by a jury. Additionally if doctor’s groups would actually police themselves and sanction their peers without legal intervention then those that are negligent in their care would be taken care of at the source. No, the ‘crying mother/sobbing grandmother’ may not mean there was negligence, but why take their possibility of a chance to see that those who did wrong are held accountable?
This President has no real interest in serious Tort Reform since he is beholden to the American Bar Association Plaintiffs attorneys. If there is some legislation, it will be so watered down that we won’t know the difference. To me, this is a States issue. States like Texas has done a lot on Tort Reform to reduce the number of nuisance claims and limit the awards against doctors and business. As a result, Texas has been attracting hundreds of businesses and doctors for years who are seeking to escape from the morass of the northeast and far left west.
uh, dudes. That 50 billion in “defensive medicine” costs goes right into the pockets of health care providers. Do you really think the health care industry is going to take a 50 bil cut in income because it is harder to sue them? Slap your foreheads, things will clear up for you.
Hollis, I don’t know where you got your number but your premise about cutting income seems a little weak since most doctors have waiting lists and malpractice is mostly a doctor issue. As for profits from the tests, they can make them without having to add a high cost of the malpractice premium on top of their charges, which they pass along to the insurers.
Maybe you should stop slapping your forehead and rethink the issue.
As it stands now, the practice of ordering numerous expensive tests by doctors will be a hard habit to break even if we have some form of Tort Reform. They have been doing it so long, they are using these tests to diagnose even on the most minor of ailments.
Obama has no business overhauling state anything. This bogus administration is taking the Big Brother idea a few steps too far.
The President is “serious” now. He really means it this time. He isn’t joking, he wants to control costs and not just insurance premiums.
Does anyone believe this guy, a guy who has the thinest of resumes of any former President, one who surrounds himself with the least amount of people in his cabinet in history who have any practical business experience. A man skilled in politics by the Chicago political mob. Give me a break.
The posts here are something else. This is an overdue step way in the right direction. This issue has been heavily on the minds of Obama’s critics (Today’s posts?). Yet, here he is taking his first shot at Tort Reform and you guys are criticizing him?
The criticism is warranted as this is a Pres that is practiced in the art of rhetoric and simply says things for effect with no intention of following through. Actions speaks louder than words and his actions, when placed against the mirror of his rhetoric, makes these type of observations spot on.
Before you act, you have to talk about it. You gave no example of his not following through on said rhetoric. You prove my point that anything this prez will do will be subject to your criticism. This latest Rhetoric, as you call it, is actually and act of “following through” on the plan to give states grants to tackle tort reform. It’s in the health care reform act.
It’s also a Repbublican idea. Good for him for reaching across the aisle and proposing something as sensible as Tort Reform.
Read up on it, bro instead of blindly criticizing his every act. States should have the right to manage Tort reform. This is an example of Obama’s NOT using the Fed to rule from above except for providing money for states with thin budgets to improve their tort system.
•Advances medical liability reform through grants to States: Provides grants to States to jump-start and evaluate promising medical liability reform ideas to put patient safety first, prevent medical errors, and reduce liability premiums.
◦(Sources: S. 1783, “Ten Steps to Transform Health Care in America Act” (Enzi bill); H.R. 3400, “Empowering Patients First Act” (Republican Study Committee bill); H.R. 4529, “Roadmap for America’s Future Act” (Ryan bill); S. 1099, “Patients’ Choice Act” (Burr-Coburn, Ryan-Nunes bill))
Examples, wow. How about the end to partisanship, or civility. How about oil drilling in the gulf, first yes, then Hell No. You want me to go on.
Med Mal reform was discussed at the Blair House summit but didn’t find its way into the bill because of trial lawyer pressure.
I know, there was no consideration for cutting costs in the bill but that doesn’t mean that there should not have been.
Ok….I gave you an example from the bill that refers to
providing money to states so they can get started on medical
torm reform. I pasted it into my post.
Your oil example is rediculous given that the energy policies
under the old administration were gutted which allowed the BP
oil spill to happen. A temporary ban on Gulf oil drilling
had to happen. There was no choice.
The ruination of parisanship and civility was not Obama’s
doing. Obama was the one who held a question and answer
session with a Republican only group of legislators.
It was televised. Can you imagine Bush II doing that with the opposition??
It was a Republican Congressman who yelled “you lie”
during last year’s state-of-the-union. Would you call
civil? You are grasping at straws dude.
D, money to the states for med mal reform. Med Mal, as is insurance, is a State issue, not a Federal issue, so he gets no points for that.
Oil spill, you need to think about who controlled the inspection process just prior to the failure and you also need to do some research on the concept of “regulatory capture”.
The Blair House meeting was simply a photo-op as Pres O went on to pass this mess without support from Repubs or the American People, so, again, you score no points with your point.
As for the canard of “civlity” by this Pres, let’s look at the cause of the “Beer Summit”, the you bring a knife, I bring a gun quote, the “punish our enemy” comment to a Latino group, and now the “seems like union busting” comment to the current state of affairs in Wisc where he attempts to insinuate himself into a State issue.
By the way, there are literally thousands of other wells in the Gulf that have operated for years without incident, so there was a choice, one which has rational math behind it, not just political point scoring as its goal.
you’re breaking my heart….
Obama bad oogah boogah
Tom, your post makes the most sense. Now that we have no discernible energy policy other than making solar panels and wind turbines (by GE), we are most vulnerable to the tribulations of the Middle East. We will see $4 gas before summer and we are not drilling or building nuclear plants. EPA is still trying to impose CAP & Trade which will only hurt the economy more with layoffs. If they really wanted to create jobs, turn the energy industry loose and let them develop it. We have more than enough energy supplies in this country.
A panel of expert (judges) to review and decide on a medical case is the only way to be fair. This rule of being judged by your peers doesn’t work any longer in the complex manner of providing health care. The crying mother, or sobbing grandma doesn’t mean that the doctor was negligent yet that is the only part the jury seems to grasp. Let’s get real, punish those that were negligent and let the other 99.99% of the medical health profession do their job without the fear of becoming a lotto ticket for some sad family.
What no one seems to address in this climate of medical malpractice tort reform is that to even get to the point where your case is heard before a judge or even a full trial requires in most states that the merits of the case be review by a panel of the doctor’s peers. That’s right, other physicians and nurses are placed on a panel to review the case – meaning only cases that have REAL merit ever make it to the point of being heard by a jury. Additionally if doctor’s groups would actually police themselves and sanction their peers without legal intervention then those that are negligent in their care would be taken care of at the source. No, the ‘crying mother/sobbing grandmother’ may not mean there was negligence, but why take their possibility of a chance to see that those who did wrong are held accountable?
This President has no real interest in serious Tort Reform since he is beholden to the American Bar Association Plaintiffs attorneys. If there is some legislation, it will be so watered down that we won’t know the difference. To me, this is a States issue. States like Texas has done a lot on Tort Reform to reduce the number of nuisance claims and limit the awards against doctors and business. As a result, Texas has been attracting hundreds of businesses and doctors for years who are seeking to escape from the morass of the northeast and far left west.
uh, dudes. That 50 billion in “defensive medicine” costs goes right into the pockets of health care providers. Do you really think the health care industry is going to take a 50 bil cut in income because it is harder to sue them? Slap your foreheads, things will clear up for you.
Hollis, I don’t know where you got your number but your premise about cutting income seems a little weak since most doctors have waiting lists and malpractice is mostly a doctor issue. As for profits from the tests, they can make them without having to add a high cost of the malpractice premium on top of their charges, which they pass along to the insurers.
Maybe you should stop slapping your forehead and rethink the issue.
As it stands now, the practice of ordering numerous expensive tests by doctors will be a hard habit to break even if we have some form of Tort Reform. They have been doing it so long, they are using these tests to diagnose even on the most minor of ailments.