Have you actually had direct contact with the realm of Medicine or are you talking out of your To-young-for-real-life-exp ass? There are other factors involved, This discusion has remained active for a long time. You arguement lacks facts and figures and the knowledge of the way the system works curently. readress the issue maturely and i may consider spending more time to rebuke you.
After spending several minutes shaking my head and chuckling uncontrollably, I think your response, Jaed, to Durangobob's post may warrant more "tact." Timid, you are not.
Durangobob, there is certainly more at stake than what meets the eye, and I second the motion to do some more homework. Still, I can certainly appreciate the obvious fact you're already exhibiting enough social conciousness to consider these issues and what may be at stake.
:::stradling the fence::::
"BAF! BAM! KAPOW!" - Batman and Robin
The power should remain in the courts and jury, and not in the hands of politicians and lobbyists.
Last time i check we had a right to trial by jury..and it's in the constitution for both state and federal. No where in the proposition does it grant cheaper rates for patients. Whose to say that w/ the money left over from capped damages will go to the patients? Um...it doesn't say. Matter of fact the proposition says that the legislature will decide what needs to be capped in other civil suits.
If you look on the prop12 will see the word "other actions" which can be translated to drunk driver incidents, manufacturer defects, and environmental catastrophies.
That is why prop12 would have to change the constitution...which is absurd. If the people want to have lower insurance premiums more doctors, then we need to pass a bill that would do that. Lets not pass a bill that leave our decisions of trial by jury into the hand of big business.
There are better ways to lower insurance and rates and this has to be the most embarassing way to get ppl to actually swallow this down. I can't believe rick perry is televising his commercial.. he's lying bald faced to the Texans.
Lets wake up ppl and send big business, lobbyists, and politicians that the people and the courts speak for what is right and fair.
Not the payed elected officials..
by all means please rebuke, this is why our system of democracy works because the power of debate and dissent. I may introduce new things, as well as yourself.
The power of democracy fails when people discredit others actions or opinions because their own ego is too big for themselves. Thus limiting the minority expression, and freedom of speech.
Age has nothing to do w/ political activeness...i know plenty of college students, parents, friends, grandparents who swallow up what is fed to them w/o coming up w/ their own opinion. Therefore political activity has nothing to do w/ age, so please refrain from that implication.
Unlimited noneconomic damages turn the justice system into a ?lottery.? Juries often are sympathetic to plaintiffs and award them much more than a settlement would provide because that is what the jurors would want for themselves. Given that economic damages, which compensate for medical costs and lost earnings, would not be capped, a limit on noneconomic damages would ensure that plaintiffs received the compensation they deserved.
Unlimited noneconomic damages also undermine the state?s health-care system. Lawyers pursue medical malpractice cases in hopes of reaping large sums of money in emotional cases with jurors who may not understand the impact of multimillion-dollar awards on the entire health-care system. Noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering and disfigurement can be difficult to quantify precisely, unlike economic damages such as medical costs and lost earnings. When premiums rise too high, doctors stop practicing, thereby threatening access to medical care for all Texans.
Capping noneconomic damages at reasonable limits would encourage insurers to do business in Texas by ensuring that they would not incur massive losses because of large damage awards. As more insurers joined the market, competition would reduce premiums.
Texas voters should be able to decide this issue quickly so that the cap on noneconomic damages can take effect without delay. Factors other than soaring noneconomic damage awards have had minimal impact on causing higher medical malpractice premiums. The decline in the stock market is not to blame, nor did excessive competition in the 1990s artificially hold down premiums relative to the current high rates, as evidenced by the dwindling number of insurers in Texas. Only comprehensive medical liability reform, with reasonable caps on noneconomic damages, will end this crisis, which is forcing too many doctors to drop their practices. If approved by Texas voters, HJR 3 would ensure that courts would not overturn the Legislature?s attempts to resolve the medical malpractice crisis.
Even if the current Supreme Court found a damage cap constitutional, a future court could overturn it.
"BAF! BAM! KAPOW!" - Batman and Robin
Yah, already informed of all those pro prop12 arguments. Sadly enough the proposed bill says nothing about lowering inurance costs or premiums...u can go to the house of representatives website...
If it stated that insurance must contribue 10,20, or 30% of savings and distribute to patients then we could talk. But since it says nothing of the sort...whose to say the savings are passed on to the patients...only one way to find out right? If you wanna find out change our texas constitution. If you really want lower premiums then you should rally for that cause through other means.
A simple google search will further reveal that big business are the proponents of prop 12, and hmm..i wonder why? Texas has been a favorite for big business because they can get away with so much. Our worker compensation laws are slow and weak, and w/ the exclusion of a state income tax, the wealthy are not contributing back to texas, thus creating more burden for the minority.
Opponents of prop 12 include a few doctors, AARP, ACLU, LULAC, GI Forum, and the list goes on for organizations that represent the minority..not just the economically disadavantaged but the senior citizens of texas.
And yes i know juries often are sympathetic towards the victims and can award absurd amounts of money, but we shouldn't hold the juries, or courts accountable for that. We already have in place a cap set at 750,000 for malpractice and it was signed by Gov Rick perry.
The Legislature last May passed House Bill 4, a comprehensive tort reform bill. That bill limits medical malpractice awards for noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering to $250,000 from physicians, $250,000 from hospitals and $250,000 from nursing homes, or no more than $750,000 from all parties combined for a single claim. I voted for it.
?A constitutional amendment concerning civil lawsuits against
doctors and health care providers, and other actions,
authorizing the legislature to determine limitations on
However, opponents of the amendment fear Proposition 12 could open the door for legislators to take similar action on other civil lawsuits, including drunken driving cases and negligence suits against companies.
How would prop 12 help texans? It wouldn't. The key words in the ballot are "and other actions". Which ultimately will open the door to legislators to regulate all civil suits. On january 1, 2005 legislators, will have the ability to set caps on these so called other actions, which would include but not limited to manufactur defects cases, toxic pollutant hazards, drunk driving, sexual assault, and the list goes on.
This so called "tort reform" is nothing of the sort, it's being disquised as the best thing to hit congress since sliced bread when in fact it is not. Please don't change the constituition, we passed HB4 that actually targets frivolous lawsuits w/o the need to change the constitution.
There are other ways to fight frivolous lawsuits and HB4 is the perfect example. HJR3...requires to change the constitution which is not neccessary.
Hey there Bob, I am glad that you fianly started to use some Quotes in your argument, that is the first step to being a "Big Boy". I was begining to think you hadn't learned anything in High School. Two Questions: What are you talking about when it comes to the whole "no jury" idea? Second What personal knowledge do you have concerning this issue? Are you attempting to join the ranks of 1990's Pearl Jam fans here and "Damn the Man"? You have made the same statements over and over again. The fact is that every one who is against this is in it for the money as well. Those who have it want to keep it those who don't want it, or in your case want to see those who have loose it to some one esle. YES we medical professionals make mistakes. YES we can be sued. YES we can currently loose our entire net worth based on a biased SOB story. But we do not all lose our ability to practice. Those cases I am sure you studied on any number of Day time Talk shows ( some where between the three-day-old--pizza-breakfast, and the Ten-am-beer-chug) have doctors who were sued ****less but are still practicing. If your issue is saftey... (aparently it isn't because your primary bitch fest is about people not recieving money in the form of settlement or "insurence savings" <worlds biggest oxymoron by the way> ) then maybe you should pursue a bill or act that would limit the Physicans practiceing capabilities after a major mistake. It seems Young man thatyou are highly intrested in where the money of this world goes to. That is a useless waste of time and energy. Many people have died for this and many more will continue to die for it. just think about ways to increase the saftey of those who require the CIVIL SERVICES of American Medicine.
My next point is that American Medicine is so damn expensive due to arbitrary suits. There are many great doctors who lose money to Insurence hikes and to false suits, so many so that many are leaving the field or moving to another state. Did you actually follow this from its inception in Pennsylvania? Or did you tune in While toasted on Willie Weed and shrooms listing to your roomate strum some strings about medicine...? Doctors will leave the state to pursue lower insurence rates. And I think that if you consider haveing an anual insurence bill that rivals the cost of your curent four year education then you can see thier point.
Please learn this and learn it now: Insurence companies are in it to make money. THAT IS ALL. You should have learned that the first time your Pappy tied a brick to your shoe and let you have your own car. they have no intrest in you, no more than the intrest that you have in a homeless dude on the corner of 15th and 35. Thats just what people think they are designed to do. If insurence companies really looked after people the way they expect then insurence would be a modern religion. All would worship in the house of Aetna. You have got a lot to learn about the assumption that all people swallow what they are fed. (Pst, here's a little tip: YOU EMBODIE THOSE PEOPLE!)