Constructive gadfly
according to George Will
Published on October 12, 2004 By stevendedalus In Politics

George will has targeted two democratic groups that have contributed to the impediment of the Republican ideology: trial lawyers and unions. Trial lawyers are the scapegoats for runaway health costs, though it affects less than one percent of the spiraling escalation. Unions, though on the decline in general, are substantially healthy in the governmental sector.

Will’s contention is that most of the work done by government — federal, state and local — could be performed by private contractors. This, of course, would include public education as well, which, he claims, generates a greater per-pupil cost than the private education that precludes union representation. Obviously Will does not bother to defend the higher costs of private universities as opposed to state institutions; nor does it stir him into checking out the number of defense contractors that are unionized — after all, national defense is sacrosanct. In addition, Will is not concerned with stats that may show that a well-fed army of government employees enhances a thriving economy by greater middle class consumption that is not hindered by individual costs of health insurance plaguing most of the private sector. And if there were massive cuts in the numbers of government employees, where would they go? — to the unproductive rolls of unemployment insurance. It is obvious that Will in opposition the Democratic Party is bent on diminishing the middle class by the presumed “on the cheap” private industries primarily obsessed with building a lower and higher class at the expense of those in the middle.

Trial lawyers, admittedly motivated by profiteering rather than championing the little guy in distress, nonetheless do, with the help of a jury, empower victims of blatant incompetence. Isolated incidents such as the old lady that burned her herself with MacDonald’s coffee is unquestionably absurd but could never make the cut of today’s frivolous test. Small business owners with insurance should only be sightly more wary of lawsuits than a private homeowner. The real problem is in the insurance companies themselves that are fraught with high deductibles and unreasonable cushioned premiums dedicated to the preservation of an excessively profitable bottom line. Return on the dollar from government taxes far exceed the bang for the buck that policy holders get from high liability insurance costs. Health insurance costs come from the exaggerated hysteria on the part of hospitals and physicians when they engage in unnecessary defensive medicine under the fearful pretense of litigation, admitting, as it were, to wholesale malpractice. The patent view, not the perception, is that overwhelmingly malpractice is undetected.

George Will also infers that conservatives are whetting their appetite for growing self-reliance as the aging population of the New Deal and WW II disappears from the face of the earth so that laissez-faire can be brush off and touched up with a new rugged face.

               

Copyright © 2004 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: October 12, 2004.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Oct 14, 2004
Or in other words: People who don't have to pay for their health care have an advantage over people who pay for their own health care.
There are no free rides ; government employees do pay for health care; unions negotiate for health insurance and trade off raises in pay. [Your quote should read: people who have no insurance, in the long run, are shouldered by those who do have it.]  
on Oct 15, 2004
Yeah, but some of what trial lawyers do is good. If I go in to get my appendix taken out and they amputate my leg, I want to be able to sue.


Agreed. But if you give birth to a baby, and the baby has defects, how is that the fault of a caring OBGYN? Because Edwards says it is?

There are some times that you need lawyers, and then there are times, they just suck the life blood out of innocent people. We have all heard of the Stella cases, and Lawyers are too happy to jump on those cases for the fat contigencies.
on Oct 15, 2004
What do you mean then by "hindered by individual costs of health insurance plaguing most of the private sector." ?

Yes, it's true that people who utilize medical services without paying for them are shouldered by people who do pay for medical services.
on Oct 15, 2004
But if you give birth to a baby, and the baby has defects, how is that the fault of a caring OBGYN?
This hits too close to home; I lost my grandson last year to birth defects--there was no lawsuit, not even thought of.
on Oct 15, 2004
What do you mean then by "hindered by individual costs of health insurance plaguing most of the private sector." ?
But for major corporations who wrangle discounts from large pooling, small businesses have no such luxury which by the way was part of Hillary's plan to regionalize business medical pools.
on Oct 19, 2004
Posted By: Dr. Guy
Date Posted: 10/12/2004 1:33:21 PM

Trial lawyers are the scapegoats for runaway health costs, though it affects less than one percent of the spiraling escalation
Please provide a source for this mis-statement. Other than triallawyers.org.


According to the VP debate transcript, the number comes from the Congressional Budget Office
on Oct 19, 2004

Reply #17 By: Dr. Guy - 10/15/2004 9:05:47 AM
Yeah, but some of what trial lawyers do is good. If I go in to get my appendix taken out and they amputate my leg, I want to be able to sue.


Agreed. But if you give birth to a baby, and the baby has defects, how is that the fault of a caring OBGYN? Because Edwards says it is?


Also a good point, Dr. Guy. I've made it no secret around here that John Edwards bugs the living piss out of me.
on Oct 19, 2004
Posted By: Madine
Date Posted: 10/12/2004 2:00:05 PM

The real problem is in the insurance companies themselves that are fraught with high deductibles and unreasonable cushioned premiums dedicated to the preservation of an excessively profitable bottom line

I haven't been hearing that insurance companies are making out like bandits.


A short Forbes article (10/19/04) about why Aetna and Humana are now "hold" instead of "buy"...one reason...."the recent news of HMOs' high profits while their accounts face high premium rates; which we believe will pressure future premium rate hikes."
The Spitzer probe discussed in the article is due to market manipulation by insurance companies (see 2nd link).

Link
Link

2 Pages1 2