[Vision2020] A Pledge to real Americans (Mikey Moore)

[Tony]

Andreas, thanks for the clarification, but it was my understanding that tort 
reform would affect far more litigation than strictly malpractice......? 
Whether it is a doctor being sued or a municipality, would tort reform not 
affect both, and would not the resulting reduction in judgments benefit the 
average insurance holder, even as it understandably upset the democratic 
friendly attorney's lobby?

Hmmmm,  "paycheck protection"?  Would that have anything to do with 
protecting union workers from having their wages automatically withheld and 
given to political candidates they may or may NOT support?

Save some dressing for me.       -T


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
To: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Pledge to real Americans (Mikey Moore)


> On 11/22/06, Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net> wrote:
>> Andreas, are you taking the position that ridiculously outlandish, cash
>> judgments have not driven up the cost of insurance coverage for the 
>> general
>> public?
>
> Oh, they have.
>
> But in 2004, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reported
> that only 2% of the increase in medical care costs are related to
> malpractice torts, and that there was no statistically significant
> difference in medical care costs between states with and without caps
> on medical malpractice liability. The Republican push for tort reform,
> like anti-union "paycheck protection" laws, are not so much an attempt
> to institute actual reforms as they are  attempts to shut off the flow
> of potential funds to Democratic candidates from Democratic-friendly
> groups.
>
> -- ACS
>
>