WP: Bush to Seek Limits on Lawsuits

Fierce Battle Over Curbs Is Expected

Empowered by reelection and a more Republican Congress, President Bush and his White House aides are betting that 2005 will be the year for big strides in the longtime conservative crusade to curb lawsuits and bring to heel trial lawyers who profit at the expense of corporations.

But as Bush heads to Illinois this morning to launch a major campaign to change the nation's laws on medical-malpractice and class-action lawsuits, allies on Capitol Hill and top business groups warn that prospects for change are less favorable than many had assumed after Bush's victory two months ago.

The recently publicized problems of pharmaceutical companies and a handful of GOP dissidents spell trouble for one of the most far-reaching proposals in the Senate -- the same place where Democrats and their trial-lawyer supporters have managed to kill similar measures in recent years, according to business lobbyists and Senate leadership aides.

(snip)

And Republicans do not have a unified front. Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) has called Bush's plan for capping malpractice suffering awards among the worst bills facing this Congress, and one that appears to unfairly and unwisely target trial lawyers. "The dirty little secret in Washington is the trial lawyers have a few Republicans in their pocket," a Republican close to Bush said.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48532-2005Jan4.html

god bless "real" Republicans!

but why do I think bush will f*ck this up somehow?

Judges and courts should rule as to what is a valid case and what is not. Juries should decide on rewards or lack thereof, this idea that tort reform will solve a crisis in lawsuits is fabricated.

... of Texas, in this regard. It's a sham. Corporations spend far more money suing each other than paying out for medical malpractice or personal injury.

Every one of the claims made by politicians regarding tort reform have been provided to them by insurers, who are the only ones to benefit from tort reform.

Here's a fact: the amount of money spent by insurers on medical malpractice is less than 2% of operating expenses.

Here's another: the number of suits between corporations is 60% higher than all personal injury cases combined.

Here's another: the average for personal injury awards is $38,000--far lower than the advertised big cases. Big awards and personal injury suits have been declining in the last ten years, without tort reform.

Here's another: the Constitution guarantees the right to sue. Tort reform diminishes that right.

Here's another: Texas politicians told the public that medical malpractice tort reform would reduce health care costs. A month ago, the insurance lobby in Texas stated that malpractice awards had a "negligible impact" on malpractice insurance costs when announcing a large increase in medical malpractice insurance rates for Texas physicians.

This legislation benefits only two segments of the country--corporations and their bought-and-paid-for politicians. It benefits the average person not one whit.

Only the 3-4 sentences of Bush make it to the public.

... those facts, so the conclusion is that either the newspapers don't want to offend potential advertisers or they're lazy in researching the facts.

Or, more simply, liberal media, my ass.

Beyond the obvious lies, there's another strategy behind tort reform, which Karl Rove is said to have mentioned to supporters of Bush. The plan is to use tort reform to reduce the income of those "liberal" trial lawyers so that they have less money to contribute to evil liberal Democrats.

There's some twisted logic behind that suggestion, in addition to all the benefits accruing to corporate contributors to Bush.

On edit, this advice applies to all proposed legislation: "look for the one-eyed, bearded man with a limp." It's another way of saying that most legislation benefits someone or some business specifically, and thinking about the effect of the legislation on the ordinary person helps cut through all the rhetoric about how much it's going to help everyone, because odds are better than even that it's not written to help everyone.

Cheers.

I knew it wasn't as bad as the repubs are making it out to be. Still, what was done to the tobacco companies really bothers me, and the coffee was too hot incident at McDonalds. These things really do happen. And it's not right.

one more thing - Texas is almost as corrupt as mafia-run-russia and with probably the most regressive tax system in the country. I can't say much good about that state after living in that hell hole.

All you heard from the MSM on the McDonald's case was the huge initial award. You didn't hear that the amount was reduced on appeal to something more in line with the average award I mentioned. Nor did you hear that McDonald's, after that case, reduced the temperature of their coffee, because it was previously kept hot enough to burn skin.

And, why should you moan about what happened to the tobacco companies? They hid evidence from their own research from the courts and Congress for more than forty years. They lied, repeatedly, about the addictive nature of nicotine. They got caught at it, and the courts responded appropriately. They've used very sophisticated advertising to increase their profits when they knew they were (and are still) marketing a product that was detrimental to public health. They hooked me--why should I give them a break?

But you have legitimate claims as well. In North Carolina, Duke University doctors gave an incompatible heart to a little girl, Jessica Santian, and her body rejected it. Due to negligence, the doctors wasted a heart that could have been used for another recipient. She did eventually receive a compatible heart but the little girl's body couldn't recover from the damage done to her body by the bad heart and she died.

What is this little girl's life worth? If the GOP has its way, her life is worth $250,000 and not a penny more. Never mind that $250,000 may not even cover the medical bills her family incurred. They also lost their daughter and she can't be replaced.

I don't think there should be caps. The awards are a deterrent to make sure corporations take a little more care and responsibility in their work.

Critics of civil justice and juries have pounced on the McDonald's coffee case, calling it 'frivolous' and 'laughable'. However, it was McDonald's own testimony and actions that led a jury to rule against it.

http://www.atla.org/ConsumerMediaResources/Tier3/press_room/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx#WSJ

...that you posted that link. The "coffee lawsuit" is probably the favorite whipping boy for right-wingers trying to "reform" the courts regarding lawsuits. It is also the most misunderstood. It was anything but frivolous as even a casual perusal of the facts regarding the case will show. Thanks!:toast:

industry actually overseeing its members and disciplining them, the FDA properly regulating the pharmaceutical companies, those would be helpful.

When is the last time you saw a Pinto auto on the highway?

(As for as malpractice insurance - isn't that a business expense that docs get to claim on their taxes?)

health care. They are the people's only recourse to the HMOs, insurance companies and big Pharma. It is VERY bad.

The lawsuits are not a problem, except for corporate profits.

ions from running completely wild over us. Ralph Nader has spoken at length about the subject. Most people have no idea exactly how evil the corporate beast is.

Controlling corporations and restoring democracy
By Ralph Nader

The massive corporate wave of crime, fraud and abuse rolls on, is undeterred by regular exposes in the business media itself. My favorite corporate crime journal (aka the Wall Street Journal) is a daily newspaper that never runs out of material.

Daily Journal headlines recently alerted readers to: (1) “Lucent Faces Bribery Allegations,” (2) “Companies Sue Union Retirees to Cut Promised Health Benefits,” (3) “How Drug’s Rebirth as Treatment for Cancer Fueled Price Rises,” reporting one capsule for $29 compared to a price of seven cents in Brazil, (4) “A Retired Maid’s Questions About her ATM Card Led Lawyer to Georgia Scandal,” (5) “At Cigna, Some Patients Found Conflict of Interest in System,” (6) “As Corporate Fines Grow, SEC Debates How Much Good They do.” (7) From the Associated Press – “Calif. Insurance Chief Sues Four Insurance Giants in Kickback Probe.” Also in the headlines are the pharmaceutical companies led by Merck’s deadly fiasco with Vioxx.

more:
http://www.gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=929

Lawsuits and malpractice have been shown to have no connection to rising insurance costs. They are, however, often the only way for ordinary people to make a significant enough dent in a corporation to fight back against harmful or dangerous products and practices. The few outrageous cases that are screamed at the top of the media's lungs are hardly representative of the whole.

It's absolutely disgusting how this man stands before the American people and LIES to them (and, yes, an intentional misrepresentation of facts is a damned LIE)!!!

He screws the many to advantage the few!!!

Fuck him.

Secondary benefits are that corporations would be benefited and would have more to be $ thankful $ to the GOP for.

Like most of his agenda, Bush's tort reform is not nearly as benign as he would have the public believe. A better understanding of it is available in Grover Norquist's article "The Democratic Party is Toast".

The whole article is interesting for a view of what to expect of this gang of thugs and why.

About tort reform he says,

"Trial lawyer money is now a major part of the Democratic Party, but it is wholly dependent on legislators and courts maintaining the present tort laws that allow lawyers to interject themselves into any and all contracts and relationships."

"They siphon off some $240 billion a year--$40 billion of which stays with a few thousand lawyers."

In other words, tort reform is really principally about weakening and killing off the Democratic Party.

Durn those lawyers. I think I will take a Vioxx for that.

ya got me

(and I'll throw in an extra Scottie whopper for free)

snip>
But the lawyers who win those awards for malpractice victims and other opponents of Bush's initiative say the real problem is insurers who look to raise premiums and, consequently, their bottom line. They also use personal stories to tell their side, such as a woman who said doctors switched her test results and mistakenly told her she had breast cancer before amputating both her breasts. She is featured in a $250,000 television ad buy in the St. Louis and Washington markets to coincide with Bush's visit.

McClellan on Tuesday brushed aside questions about whether Bush would examine rising malpractice insurance rates. McClellan blamed "unlimited and unpredictable liability awards" for raising the cost of health insurance premiums and making insurance too expensive for some Americans.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=385403&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Chimp is trying to get some feathers/favors in his hat before he goes off stage.

... they were talking about Bu$h's frivolous law suit against Enterprise Car Rental. Seems that it was filed after a minor accident involving one of the twins.

I'm a resident of state X. My doctor lives and practices in state X. The alleged negligence took place in state X. I cannot for the life of me (pardon pun) figure out what federal law has to do with medical malpractice, unless you are talking about a multistate HMO.

and misleading statistics. All you ever see in the newspapers is that the insurance companies are whining about the 'number of $1-million-plus malpractice awards" or some inflammatory statement like that.

This figure is a complete shuck, because it's utterly meaningless.

What I have never seen in a newspaper article is the one thing that would support the insurance companies' whining that they have to raise rates--a simple figure showing that the total amount paid out by insurance companies has risen at all, much less to the point where they're losing money (or even seeing their increase in profits slow down).

And just try to bring a malpractice suit some time. There are all kinds of tricks and traps in most states' insurance laws that doctors are very well aware of, and which they use skillfully to string you along until the statute of limitations kicks in (two years where I live).

I have nerve damage that will never go away, and that destroyed my ability to make money as a musician. This specific nerve damage is caused 98-99% of the time by a surgeon's improper procedure during a specific type of surgery. And because of the malpractice-suit laws in my state, the surgeon who crippled me bears exactly zero responsibility.

(Not to insult doctors; there are some damn fine ones out there, and I know things are not easy for them these days.)

Redstone

and Bush is scum.

He cares nothing about ordinary citizens, and cares everything about his wealthy political buddies and corporate donors.
Every day more and more I hear about him makes me sick:puke:

What about us ordinary citizens? What's going to happen to us?

The way things are going by the end of this scum's term, ordinary citizens will have no rights left whatsoever.