Blog Stroll # 3: Tort Reform Wrong Medicine for Health Care Probs
There's a new entry on Piece of Mind cutting down an article that attempts to argue that tort reform will fix the problem of prohibitive health care costs (an argument that is about as tired and uninformed as the McDonald's argument for caps on damages). The blog is a good read and there's some interesting commenting going on over there. Here's a sneak preview:
The root of the problem is not people who go to the doctor too frequently. And more government interference is not the solution. If Congress and the Legislature want to get involved, they can start with tort reform.
There are so many levels on which to attack this silly statement - just the obvious: If government interference is not the solution, why do you advocate government interference in lawsuits and settlements in the form of caps? Isn’t that, like, massive interference?
And what, pray tell, is the exact relationship between Insure Montana’s problems and tort reform? (Hint - if you guessed “none”, you score a point. This is classic non sequitur.)
And what is the relationship between rising medical costs and legal settlements (”frivolous” lawsuits)? As John Kerry stated in one of the presidential debates in 2004, medical malpractice suits contribute less than 1%2% of the rising cost of health care...
Read more here.
The author, Mark Tokarski, really brings it on home when he argues that tort reform is a "solution" that only benefits the wealthiest members of society... And if we're concerned with the rising cost of health care, you'd think we'd want a solution that helps those who, say, are struggling to pay for the rising cost of health care. I don't know, maybe that's a little too much like right, as some say.