[Baketech]

Kerredy finally shut up about his service record, conveniently bypassed his Senate record and now is bemoaning the high cost of health care in our country. It's an interesting position considering his running mate made millions destroying the health care system in his home state.

Here is an interesting article about Edwards concern for rising health care costs.

In Case You Missed It: Edwards' Malpractice Suits Leave Bitter Taste
From The Washington Times
By Charles Hurt
August 16, 2004

The American Medical Association lists North Carolina's current health care situation as a "crisis" and blames it on medical-malpractice lawsuits such as the ones that made Democratic vice-presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards a millionaire many times over.

One of the most successful personal-injury lawyers in North Carolina history, Mr. Edwards won dozens of lawsuits against doctors and hospitals across the state that he now represents in the Senate. He won more than 50 cases with verdicts or settlements of $1 million or more, according to North Carolina Lawyers Weekly, and 31 of those were medical-malpractice suits.

During his 20 years of suing doctors and hospitals, he pioneered the art of blaming psychiatrists for patients who commit suicide and blaming doctors for delivering babies with cerebral palsy, according to doctors, fellow lawyers and legal observers who followed Mr. Edwards' career in North Carolina.

"The John Edwards we know crushed [obstetrics, gynecology] and neurosurgery in North Carolina," said Dr. Craig VanDerVeer, a Charlotte neurosurgeon. "As a result, thousands of patients lost their health care." …

One of his most noted victories was a $23 million settlement he got from a 1995 case -- his last before joining the Senate -- in which he sued the doctor, gynecological clinic, anesthesiologist and hospital involved in the birth of Bailey Griffin, who had cerebral palsy and other medical problems.

Linking complications during childbirth to cerebral palsy became a specialty for Mr. Edwards. In the courtroom, he was known to dramatize the events at birth by speaking to jurors as if he were the unborn baby, begging for help, begging to be let out of the womb.

"He was very good at it," said Dr. John Schmitt, an obstetrician and gynecologist who used to practice in Mr. Edwards' hometown of Raleigh. "But the science behind a lot of his arguments was flawed."

In 2003, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists published a joint study that cast serious doubt on whether events at childbirth cause cerebral palsy. The "vast majority" of cerebral palsy cases originate long before childbirth, according to the study.

"Now, he would have a much harder time proving a lot of his cases," said Dr. Schmitt, who now practices at the University of Virginia Health System. …

It is not clear just how much Mr. Edwards made as a lawyer, but estimates based on a review of his lawsuit settlements and Senate records place his fortune at about $38 million.

Like many Democrats, Mr. Edwards has benefited from the generosity of fellow trial lawyers, who have given millions of dollars to Mr. Edwards' political campaigns and other political endeavors. …

As a result of these and other cases, insurance rates for doctors have skyrocketed -- putting some out of business and driving others away, especially from rural areas. And doctors who have lost cases to Mr. Edwards have been bankrupted.

Patients, meanwhile, are left with rising health care costs and fewer -- if any -- doctors in their area. It is increasingly a nationwide problem, physicians say.

Dr. VanDerVeer, the Charlotte neurosurgeon, recalled one recent night on duty when two patients arrived in an emergency room in Myrtle Beach, S.C., where the area's last neurosurgeons quit earlier this year.

"No one in Myrtle Beach would accept responsibility for these patients," he said. And because it was raining, the helicopters were grounded, so the patients were loaded into ambulances and driven the four hours to Charlotte.

Upon arrival, one patient had died, and the other learned that she merely had a minor concussion -- and a $6,000 bill for the ambulance ride.

"That's just one little slice of life here," Dr. VanDerVeer said. "It's a direct result of the medical-malpractice situation that John Edwards fomented."

Dr. Schmitt had spent 20 years delivering babies in Raleigh. Though he had no claims against him, his insurance tripled in one year. With no assurances that his rates would ever drop, or just stop rising, he left town. …

"We are currently being sued out of existence," Dr. VanDerVeer said. "People have to choose whether they want these lawyers to make gazillions of dollars in pain and suffering awards or whether they want health care."

Full Story: - http://www.washingtontimes.com/natio...1234-1949r.htm

[ND4SPD]

And Bush is the criminal?

[luvtolean]

[Baketech]

This is probably one of the factors why his home state of N.C. is still leaning towards Bush....

[ND4SPD]

By the way, Ohio is in very much the same boat. Health insurance costs are outrageous. Many doctor's have left because of the malpractice insurance costs.

[ccwilli3]

oh yeah, just like Gore, no way Edwards will win his "home" state of NC. Its gonna go bush all the way, count on it!

Didn't clinton run on health care in 1992, yet we are still waiting...

[ER]

Yeah, I've seen all that but I haven't mentioned it because I wanted to encourage more debate about the Kerry/Edward stance. Frivilous litigation is the single biggest reason that health care is so expensive. Period. Insurance companies are just like every other business out there - they want to make a profit. They're going to offer the lowest prices they can but they have to cover their own costs first.

Anti-capitalists don't realize that the best way to keep down the costs of the things we need is to let the free market run. Left to themselves, the insurance companies will have to continue to find a way to offer the best coverage at the most affordable price because people are going to shop around. The Goverment's role in all of this was to offer them reasonable protection against gold-digging lawyers. It's role was not and should NEVER be to step in and take over health care as we know it. Think freedoms are waning now? Wait until big Government has a say as to who, what, where, why, and how you can seek medical help.

But don't tell that to those swinging from the jock-strap of the "Free health care for all" movement.

[ER]

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

Didn't clinton run on health care in 1992, yet we are still waiting...

Yeah, and we almost ended up with HillaryCare. It's only a matter of time, but at least Socialized medicine was stalled.

[ccwilli3]

Originally Posted by ER

Yeah, and we almost ended up with HillaryCare. It's only a matter of time, but at least Socialized medicine was stalled.

Every 4 years, that seems to be their motto: "Healthcare". Yet it never happens...

[ER]

Originally Posted by ccwilli3

Every 4 years, that seems to be their motto: "Healthcare". Yet it never happens...

It's always going to be the same old promises, because there are plenty of people who will vote for the party that offers them the most. Kinda like the chicken and the egg paradox, which came first - the voter looking for a free handout or the politician promising one?

Healthcare would be affordable to a large portion of the population if the excessive and frivilous lawsuits weren't successful. It doesn't cost $5000 to operate an ambulance for several hours, but it does cost that much to cover for future, impending lawsuits. This becomes poltical when a particular party panders to the trial-lawyer lobby and accept large donations from them. Once again, special interests run this country.

Those who are going to vote Kerry into office need to ask themselves if they honestly believe he has the American people's best interest in mind with his Liberal taxing, spending, and socialization ideas. Free healthcare for all isn't free - it will cost the population (well, the small percentage on which he's going to lay the cost) billions and billions of dollars. Since he's not going to offer any spending cuts (other than the military, of course), he will have to raise taxes to pay for it. Meanwhile, his cronies fight Bush's every attempt to allow people to privatize part of their Social Security money while telling senior citizens that he's going to take their checks away from them.

Bush is no saint and this isn't a hooray Bush speech. It's a Scary-Kerry one. Lefties like Kery want to continue to grow the Federal Government while bringing more and more people under their control (i.e. healthcare, welfare, etc). Many people shun their personal responibilities to do the best they can for Kerry's promises of free handouts, income-tax "credits" (taken from tax-payers, of course) and safety. Sorry, but the Government's original purpose was NEVER to promise anyone a free-ride, but rather to promote and protect the basis rights of the citizens pursuing their own dreams uninhibited by Governmental restrictions. If we ever returned to that we would see living conditions improved, costs reduced, and opportunities abound.

Sorry for the rant...

[Heavy-Dee]

Originally Posted by ER

HillaryCare. :.

Nice use of camel case ya damned programmer!

[spillover]

Originally Posted by ER

Frivilous litigation is the single biggest reason that health care is so expensive. Period.

How are cases that are won considered frivolous litigation?

[spillover]

Originally Posted by ER

Free healthcare for all isn't free - it will cost the population (well, the small percentage on which he's going to lay the cost) billions and billions of dollars. Since he's not going to offer any spending cuts (other than the military, of course), he will have to raise taxes to pay for it.

Didn't we solve that whole 'Taxation Without Representation' thing two hundred or so years ago? Something about a war, a new found country, a confederacy, and then a congress.

[ER]

Originally Posted by Heavy-Dee

Nice use of camel case ya damned programmer!

Ha ha ha! I busted out laughing when I read this. That's funny considering I was just adding new code to my project when I came here.

[ER]

Originally Posted by spillover

How are cases that are won considered frivolous litigation?

Consider these lawsuits filed (some won), as described in The Litigious Society:

• Men sue lawn-mower manufactuer after severing hands while holding the mower (running) over bushes to trim them.
• Woman sues Nintendo because her daughter sprained her thumb after excessive playing.
• Fans of a Redskins game sue the NFL after a botched all leads their team to losing the game.
• Having a brain-fart here...

Don't forget cases like the McDonald's coffee spill, etc. Currently, there's pending litigation against McDonald's because a lawyer has convinced a class-action group of overweight people that McDonald's is responsible for their current weight. "McDonald's knowingly marketed their high-fatty foods without consideration for their customers" or something like that was the quote from the lawyer.

These are examples of frivilous suits my friend. They don't have to be right to be won; it only takes a precedent in the courts or a silly jury to make the case.

[ER]

Originally Posted by spillover

Didn't we solve that whole 'Taxation Without Representation' thing two hundred or so years ago? Something about a war, a new found country, a confederacy, and then a congress.

Our current taxes have little to do with taxation without representation. What we have is a bloated, pork-filled Government that is costing us all billions and billions of dollars. Since it doesn't earn any money on its own, it has to seize funds from us to pay for whatever spending it does. Thus, when someone like Kerry comes along and promises something as expensive as free healthcare, what he is really saying is, "I'm going to tax your hard-earned paycheck to pay for free medicine for everyone, including those who will abuse the system and those who don't earn their way". But more than that, what he essentially wants to do is shift the cost of that porker onto a smaller and smaller population so that it really is free to at least majority of the voters out there (i.e. lower income earners). Hellooooooo class-warfare.

But why stop there? Why not free food for everyone? How about houses? Cars? Where should we draw the line? While healthcare is considered important today, won't food or shelter or transportation be considered tomorrow? The point is, this type of thinking takes the personal responsibility and control away from the citizen and puts it into the hands of a group of power-hungry politicians who may rarely have the best interest of a free-country in mind when making decisions (especially when it comes to getting re-elected). Oh yeah...a country isn't free when the Government takes by force from one citizen to give to another.

This isn't just something dreamt up by the "neo-Cons". This is exactly what Kerry promises. You can go the the IRS website and view the current income-taxation on your own.

[Proto]

Originally Posted by ER

Consider these lawsuits filed (some won), as described in The Litigious Society:

• Men sue lawn-mower manufactuer after severing hands while holding the mower (running) over bushes to trim them.
• Woman sues Nintendo because her daughter sprained her thumb after excessive playing.
• Fans of a Redskins game sue the NFL after a botched all leads their team to losing the game.
• Having a brain-fart here...

Don't forget cases like the McDonald's coffee spill, etc. Currently, there's pending litigation against McDonald's because a lawyer has convinced a class-action group of overweight people that McDonald's is responsible for their current weight. "McDonald's knowingly marketed their high-fatty foods without consideration for their customers" or something like that was the quote from the lawyer.

These are examples of frivilous suits my friend. They don't have to be right to be won; it only takes a precedent in the courts or a silly jury to make the case.

All very interesting but what the f*#k have they got to do with healthcare

[dB]

Originally Posted by spillover

How are cases that are won considered frivolous litigation?

A lawsuit doesn't need to be won to affect health care costs. Something like 80% of malpractice suits are dismissed with no payment to the patient. Those are the frivolous lawsuits that drive the cost of malpractice insurance ever higher.

edit: I believe the number is more like 86%, but I can't find a reference right now.

[ER]

Originally Posted by Proto

All very interesting but what the f*#k have they got to do with healthcare

He asked how a lawsuit that is won can still be considered bogus. I cited examples from memory. If two men can receive compensation for cutting off their fingers after holding a running mower over bushes then you can use your imagination to understand how doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies are being hammered every year.

I'm one of the few who still responds to you, and I do it without flames. I enjoy seeing your opposing point of view but your attitude with me sucks.

[ccwilli3]

Originally Posted by ER

I'm one of the few who still responds to you, and I do it without flames. I enjoy seeing your opposing point of view but your attitude with me sucks.

I concur.

[ccwilli3]

Gary Bloke,

why do you delete your posts?

[Proto]

ER, you said

Healthcare would be affordable to a large portion of the population if the excessive and frivilous lawsuits weren't successful.

I'll quote from another site

The number of people without health insurance (in the US) grew by about 1.4m people last year. Nearly 45m people are without health coverage, around 15.6% of the population.

Please give us more details about these bogus healthcare lawsuits. Lawn mowers, McDonalds, Nintendo really don't count. I know the US legal system has it's problems but to be able to support the healthcare of 45 million from the earnings of such litigation, things must be really bad.




To extend your argument about the elected government taking you money in the form of taxes to spend on welfare and healthcare, why not question why they spend it on education. Hell let everyone educate their own kids. Lazy bastards. Roads. Yeah, gonna build my own.

But better still why not question why they are wasting billions of dollars of YOUR taxes on weapons and a pointless war in Iraq. Or maybe you think that is a better idea than nurturing a fairer society?



ccwilli3, go to hell. I really couldn't care less what you think.