A study published in 2005 by Tom Baker, a law professor at the University of Connecticut who studies insurance, found that after all costs, including legal fees, insurance costs and payouts, the cost of medical malpractice suits comes to less than one-half of 1 percent of health-care spending.
Oh, I see its just more rhetoric they use to oppose health care reform.
Jack Fessender
Because it will save the health insurance companies lots of money. FACT.
Mecca Swineherder
to help americans
œ∑®†¥¨øåßæ÷≥ß∂ƒ©∆µ∫√ç
the same reason liberals scream racist
Samm
One study by one prefessor and it must be FACT, right?
LOL
Teleprompter Messiah
Tort reform and dropping liberal induced interstate insurance trade regulations would solve all of the healthcare problems your people whine about without a bunch of government BS.
Its just that easy. It doesnt matter what your liberal law professor says. Of course he would take that position. Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.
smsmith500
Tort reform reduced the cost of medical care when enacted in Texas. I am afraid that Mr Baker's "study" is not entirely correct, but you know that don't you?
What I find interesting is that liberals ask these "questions" then don't bother to come back. They seem to believe that their pearls of wisdom are not open to debate.
captain_trps
You are not including the unintended consequences of malpractice law suits which cause hospitals and doctors to call for billions of dollars worth of tests and procedures to immunize themselves from liability.
Rhoda
Their pockets are lined with the Insurance lobbyists money. Who wouldn't try to block health reform (insurance reform)? They received 155.5 million dollars last year. You want some rhetoric? How about death panels, popping off grandma. You republicans should be ashamed of yourselves.
Obama Joker
Because you are only looking at the smallest portion of the savings.
If doctors don't have to practice defensive medicine the savings will be enormous.
How many doctors are there in the US? All afraid of losing their MPI.
Use your head instead of listening to people who want to see socialism. Really, if the author did any investigation at all he knows he is only telling part of the story.
u_bin_called
Because unlike your guy's plan...it actually IS reform...
For example, my former pediatrician was much beloved by his patients and in the community...he was the last true "private practice" doctor I had the privilege of seeing.
When he was in his sixties he wanted to take some time to be with his grandkids, but his true love remained his practice. He would have liked to work part time , but he basically had to work for three days just to cover the costs of his liability insurance. I suppose he could have raised his prices astronomically, but I'm sure you and your professor friend would have just classified him as "another greedy doctor."
He ended up retiring full time and spent another decade feeling depressed and without purpose.
Nice try comparing "costs" to "combined spending" but academics and politicians have been playing that game for centuries....Compare, for instance the "cost" of a $ 300,000 house vs. the amount spent after that 30-year mortgage is up... you get the skewed picture...
...and by the way...the actual malpractice suits are only a small fraction of the costs rung up by the current litigious society in which we live. My old pediatrician, for example, had NEVER been sued...so your statistics would show that he had $ 0 costs associated with malpractice suits....the cost of COVERAGE and associated procedures, are the issue...funny that a lawyer would miss that point.
Orignal From: Why are the Republicans screaming for tort reform?
Post a Comment