Tort Reform, etc.

Published on January 11, 2005 By stevendedalus In Politics

Tort reform sounds great until you become the victim of an incompetent doctor or manufacturer — the old not in my backyard syndrome. Would anyone pound the table in behalf of reform if a maimed veteran of the Iraq war or the family of a son who made the ultimate sacrifice decided to litigate the Pentagon for its malpractice — is it any different from 9/11 compensations?

Why are we so stingy when it comes to funding Amtrak and so eager to subsidize airliners?

Is it too much to ask of Mexico to send a division of troops to police the illegal exodus of their countrymen along its northern border?

Why the cry against environmentalists? Granted they can be picayune, but weighed against the great strides accomplished in protecting our skies, lands and waters are their few lapses still unforgiving?

Why the hostility toward the national holiday of Christmas? As a Catholic kid in the city, I loved the school closing for Rosh Hashanah.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com

Comments

drmiler

on Jan 12, 2005

Tort Reform, etc.

By: stevendedalus
Posted: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 on http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com/
Message Board: Politics
Is it too much to ask of Mexico to send a division of troops to police the illegal exodus of their countrymen along its northern border?

It has already been asked and was refused. This is what we got instead.

Link
They're telling them how to go about getting over the border without getting caught.

stevendedalus

on Jan 12, 2005

Yeah, Mexico can't be bothered building a thriving economy to supporttheir own kind.

drmiler

on Jan 12, 2005

Reply #2 By: stevendedalus - 1/12/2005 12:42:03 AM
Yeah, Mexico can't be bothered building a thriving economy to supporttheir own kind.

Naw, they'd rather send em over here.

stevendedalus

on Jan 12, 2005

I thought NAFTA was to improve their economy, rather than damage ours?

Daiwa

on Jan 15, 2005

Although I have self-interest reasons to support tort reform, I think it is not the best solution to the problem of runaway torts. What would stop that train in its tracks, while still assuring just awards to those truly harmed by incompetence or neglect, is a "loser pays" system - no "tort reform" (recovery limits) needed.

For better or worse, the current notion of tort reform is probably the only thing that has a chance of actually happening. And, in fact, it has worked quite well in California for 30 years, so I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

Cheers,
Daiwa

stevendedalus

on Jan 15, 2005

so I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

I don't. In an old blog I suggested moving malpractice litigation to an investigative board consisting of consumers, law professors, teaching doctors, and chaired by an impartial statesman or judge to assess each complaint and possible award.

ParaTed2k

on Jan 15, 2005

The biggest problem with any tort reform is most threats to sue are settled out of court. It seems that insurance companies would rather pay plaintiffs off than let it go to court. "Loser Pays" is a great idea, but does little to reduce the problem.

stevendedalus

on Jan 18, 2005

THe loser already pays since most lawsuits are on contingency--the lawyers lose.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!