Edwards said the Senate also must make sure that legislation stops
frivolous lawsuits, not serious cases, by requiring that lawyers fully
investigate their cases before filing them.
Lawmakers also must "address the handful of bad doctors who are
responsible for a majority of malpractice cases," Edwards added."
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2003/02/24/gvl10224.htm
Edwards made the case that capping lawsuits isn't the measure needed,
but rather put restraints on the insurance agencies, investigate
doctors, and put new demands on lawyers (to help weed out frivilous
lawsuits).
This is another democrat type argument:
'"There is absolutely no reason for the most seriously injured and
most vulnerable patients to be penalized to subsidize the insurance
industry," ATLA spokesman Carlton Carl said of the HEALTH Act. "The
legislation would have no impact on malpractice insurance rates paid
by doctors."'
That's about as democratic an argument that I can find. But I must
say, their arguments don't seem to benefit or represent the American
people:
'A recent Gallup Organization poll found that the majority of
Americans recognize that there is a medical liability insurance
problem and support tort reform. According to the poll:
72% favor a limit on what patients can be awarded for pain and suffering.
57% say patients bring too many lawsuits against doctors.
64% say the issue of medical liability insurance is a crisis or major problem. "
""We believe that one essential step to lower medical malpractice
premiums is to directly address the market behavior of the companies
issuing malpractice policies," they wrote.' |