Sen. Durbin DESTROYS Republican Arguments on Malpractice Reform

[Soul Crusher]

No, this bill can be salvaged if all those clowns would work together for everybody's benefit.  Though, realistically speaking, as this thread seems to show, you might be right.

1.  Individual mandate is unconstitutional and unacceptable. 

2.  $500 billion in tax increases.

3.  No cost control whatsoever.

4.  Pushes millions onto medicade which is broke and will cause state tax hikes since the states pay for that. 

[Skip8282]

1.  Individual mandate is unconstitutional and unacceptable.  

2.  $500 billion in tax increases.

3.  No cost control whatsoever.

4.  Pushes millions onto medicade which is broke and will cause state tax hikes since the states pay for that.  

And?

Have you been reading the thread?  I said that they have to include Republican ideas and compromise.

I need a beer.



And Shootfighter:

You physicians are a PART of the problem, not on the side.  Healthcare inflation significantly outstrips regular inflation.  Not one thing in that post of yours talks about you doctors getting your fuck-ups in line.  Start with your own profession actually spending time with patients, getting to know what the fuck is going on, and reducing malpractice through better patient interaction and improved medicine.  

I've been misdiagnosed and stuck in a lot of pain as a result.  When you don't have to live through it, you don't care.  Their only saving grace was that I'm not the suing type.

Now I really need a beer...

[Soul Crusher]

And?

Have you been reading the thread?  I said that they have to include Republican ideas and compromise.

I need a beer.



And Shootfighter:

You physicians are a PART of the problem, not on the side.  Healthcare inflation significantly outstrips regular inflation.  Not one thing in that post of yours talks about you doctors getting your fuck-ups in line.  Start with your own profession actually spending time with patients, getting to know what the fuck is going on, and reducing malpractice through better patient interaction and improved medicine.  

I've been misdiagnosed and stuck in a lot of pain as a result.  When you don't have to live through it, you don't care.  Their only saving grace was that I'm not the suing type.

Now I really need a beer...

I dont know Skip - having the IRS be debt collector and enforcer for ObamaCare is sort of something I will never ever find acceptable on any level. 

[drkaje]

Al Gore voted against tort reform, too. You can't put oilmen in the white house and expect energy reform. You also can't put lawyers in the white house and expect tort reform.

The problem is simple: No tort reform or caps on malpractice will ultimately lead to reduced care for everyone. This is a matter of simple math and has nothing to do with politics.

If politicians (who are trial lawyers) had any capacity for for honesty we wouldn't even be having this discussion. They're better educated than the general public and understand malpractice premiums are unavoidable and based upon many factors.

People for universal healthcare sometimes don't understand nothing is ever free or that taxpayers aren't an ATM. I'm for an affordable, sustainable national healthcare plan, but it can't be done without controlling the costs associated with delivering medical care.

[Mons Venus]

TA don't you get it? Socialized Medicine works for members of Congress, Medicare recipients and douchebags like headgiver6. Everyone else must fend for themselves.

Hope this helps.

[Skip8282]

I dont know Skip - having the IRS be debt collector and enforcer for ObamaCare is sort of something I will never ever find acceptable on any level. 

No, but perhaps there may be other means of doing things you do find acceptable.  Each side is going to have to give and neither side wants to cede anything.  Business as usual...

[James]

TA don't you get it? Socialized Medicine works for members of Congress, Medicare recipients and douchebags like headgiver6. Everyone else must fend for themselves.

Hope this helps.

No it doesn't help, as you are an idiot.

The Democrats exempted themselves from ever going on ObamaCare, the very same plan they want to have all of us eventuality go on, and dont give me a lie that it is not for everyone, as that is their eventual goal.

So they tell us it is good, but they dont want it, and they have to use a budget Bill Procedure to pass the POS Bill.

Go feed your garbage elsewhere, as we all know this Bill stinks.

[James]

No, but perhaps there may be other means of doing things you do find acceptable.  Each side is going to have to give and neither side wants to cede anything.  Business as usual...

I did not vote and send my Representatives to Washington to meet half way on a Bill that will BankRupt us.

Our Politicians are stealing from our Children and our grandchildren, and enough is enough.

If someone enters my home to burglarize me, I wont say "hey lets me half way, just take half my stuff !!"   Just like those 2 guy's tried to steal from 240's Brother, He didn't meet them half way either.

[kcballer]

Here's the thing about medical malpractice.  Studies have proven that if the Dr is a nice guy with a good relationship with his/her patients he is less likely to be sued regardless of his care.  Dr's who seem 'cold and distant' are more likely to be sued regardless of the care they provide.  That is a fundamental problem right there.  It's not care based in a majority of cases, it's relationship based.  A quick fix is to make Dr's aware of this, tell them it's in their best interest to at least show some interest and care regarding the patient and then the stupid lawsuits would go down. 

I think something that should be included is the ability to waive liability for cheaper care.  If you're happy with your Dr and confident in their abilities you should be able to say 'okay i trust you to not fu*k up and if you do i will not sue you or i will put a cap limit on it'  The patient should have that right to decide. 

[James]

Here's the thing about medical malpractice.  Studies have proven that if the Dr is a nice guy with a good relationship with his/her patients he is less likely to be sued regardless of his care.  Dr's who seem 'cold and distant' are more likely to be sued regardless of the care they provide.  That is a fundamental problem right there.  It's not care based in a majority of cases, it's relationship based.  A quick fix is to make Dr's aware of this, tell them it's in their best interest to at least show some interest and care regarding the patient and then the stupid lawsuits would go down.

I think something that should be included is the ability to waive liability for cheaper care.  If you're happy with your Dr and confident in their abilities you should be able to say 'okay i trust you to not fu*k up and if you do i will not sue you or i will put a cap limit on it'  The patient should have that right to decide.

New Flash!!!!!   KCBaller has solved the problem.    

Note to all Doctors:   "Just be a nice person !!"







KcBaller, is so ignorant, he makes Blacken look like Einstein !

[Eyeball Chambers]

Go to the doctor at your own risk.  Seems like doctors could make patients sign liability waivers or something.

[kcballer]

New Flash!!!!!   KCBaller has solved the problem.    

Note to all Doctors:   "Just be a nice person !!"







KcBaller, is so ignorant, he makes Blacken look like Einstein !

Do you even know what you are talking about?  This was a study done on malpractice suits if you understood that, maybe sought out some truth you might be enlightened.  Instead please stay ignorant and pretend it means nothing. 

 

[Skip8282]

I did not vote and send my Representatives to Washington to meet half way on a Bill that will BankRupt us.

Our Politicians are stealing from our Children and our grandchildren, and enough is enough.

If someone enters my home to burglarize me, I wont say "hey lets me half way, just take half my stuff !!"   Just like those 2 guy's tried to steal from 240's Brother, He didn't meet them half way either.

We're not talking about a burglar in your home, we're talking about a system that affects everybody.  As such, it can't be all your way or all their way.  Somewhere there needs to be some middle ground established.

What if the Dems took out a lot of the pork, stopped trying to cover everybody, and made the program fiscally responsible?  You think it's unfair for Repubs to have to give up anything?  I don't.  If one side can sacrifice, so can the other.  Of course, it's not looking like either side will give anything of substance, so...

[James]

We're not talking about a burglar in your home, we're talking about a system that affects everybody.  As such, it can't be all your way or all their way.  Somewhere there needs to be some middle ground established.

What if the Dems took out a lot of the pork, stopped trying to cover everybody, and made the program fiscally responsible?  You think it's unfair for Repubs to have to give up anything?  I don't.  If one side can sacrifice, so can the other.  Of course, it's not looking like either side will give anything of substance, so...

We are talking about Burglary, as this is exactly what it is.

If you found out your spouse had taken out 20 credit cards, maxed out all 20 of them to over 200,000 grand in credit card debt, and  she had just applied for 20 more in your child's name,, would you agree halfway, and tell her to only get 10 ( instead of 20), and all will be ok ?

Their are some things you can meet halfway on, this is not one for them.

We cant afford Obama Care.

WE ARE BEYOND BROKE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  SO STOP SPENDING !!!!!!

[MCWAY]

No it doesn't help, as you are an idiot.

The Democrats exempted themselves from ever going on ObamaCare, the very same plan they want to have all of us eventuality go on, and dont give me a lie that it is not for everyone, as that is their eventual goal.

So they tell us it is good, but they dont want it, and they have to use a budget Bill Procedure to pass the POS Bill.

Go feed your garbage elsewhere, as we all know this Bill stinks.

Even if they do use the nuclear option, word is that Pelosi doesn't have the votes in the House to pass it, anyway.

The American people have clearly stated that, either they start from scratch or ditch this crap altogether.

The Dems are simply tone-deaf, claiming that "it's too late" too start over. It's NOT too late, for the American people.

The Dems are trying to jam this through, before they get smacked silly in November.

[James]

Even if they do use the nuclear option, word is that Pelosi doesn't have the votes in the House to pass it, anyway.

The American people have clearly stated that, either they start from scratch or ditch this crap altogether.

The Dems are simply tone-deaf, claiming that "it's too late" too start over. It's NOT too late, for the American people.

The Dems are trying to jam this through, before they get smacked silly in November.

Not yet. But a few more Back Room Purchases  .........and they might.

[Skip8282]

WE ARE BEYOND BROKE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  SO STOP SPENDING !!!!!!

Exactly.  So my question to you again is, if the Dems were able to (hypothetically) concede to a fiscally responsible bill, shouldn't the Repubs make concessions?

[James]

Exactly.  So my question to you again is, if the Dems were able to (hypothetically) concede to a fiscally responsible bill, shouldn't the Repubs make concessions?

Their is  nothing "fiscally responsible" about the main part of their Bill, which they will not remove.

So the answer to your hypothetical question is NO !

[kcballer]

Even if they do use the nuclear option, word is that Pelosi doesn't have the votes in the House to pass it, anyway.

The American people have clearly stated that, either they start from scratch or ditch this crap altogether.

The Dems are simply tone-deaf, claiming that "it's too late" too start over. It's NOT too late, for the American people.

The Dems are trying to jam this through, before they get smacked silly in November.

How is it the nuclear option?  Republicans have defended using it as within the rules.  Look at the post i put up earlier today.  In 2005 republicans said a majority is a majority and reconciliation is within the rules.  

[drkaje]

Here's the thing about medical malpractice.  Studies have proven that if the Dr is a nice guy with a good relationship with his/her patients he is less likely to be sued regardless of his care.  Dr's who seem 'cold and distant' are more likely to be sued regardless of the care they provide.  That is a fundamental problem right there.  It's not care based in a majority of cases, it's relationship based.  A quick fix is to make Dr's aware of this, tell them it's in their best interest to at least show some interest and care regarding the patient and then the stupid lawsuits would go down. 

I think something that should be included is the ability to waive liability for cheaper care.  If you're happy with your Dr and confident in their abilities you should be able to say 'okay i trust you to not fu*k up and if you do i will not sue you or i will put a cap limit on it'  The patient should have that right to decide. 

Likable doctors do get sued less but having a perfect track record only saves so much. The financial result of claims paid still gets passed on to policy holders and investors.

Let's face it, you can't "... at least show some interest and care regarding the patient.." when insurance companies have been cutting reimbursements while costs of doing business keep going up. Delivering healthcare means you must keep the office doors open, I don't see why people can't understand something this painfully simple. Someone with a few hundred thousand dollars in debt (college and practice) can't possibly stay in the business of helping people with the changes put forth unless some costs are cut.

If someone wants to advance an argument for socialized medicine where the govt is responsible for malpractice claims (similar to vaccines), go right ahead. I'd love to see people's reactions to $20-30 Million dollar claims when the taxpayer is left holding the bag, LOL! It's just a myth that all doctors are rich and that malpractice claims are free money. Some specialists pay well over $100K/year in malpractice insurance.

[BM OUT]

How is it the nuclear option?  Republicans have defended using it as within the rules.  Look at the post i put up earlier today.  In 2005 republicans said a majority is a majority and reconciliation is within the rules.  

And Obama said "the founding fathers didnt have this in mind" and  said it would be the end of the government as we know it.Its only ok if libs use it.

[kcballer]

And Obama said "the founding fathers didnt have this in mind" and  said it would be the end of the government as we know it.Its only ok if libs use it.

Never said it was okay just that republicans have defended it during the last admin so how can you complain now? 

[MCWAY]

How is it the nuclear option?  Republicans have defended using it as within the rules.  Look at the post i put up earlier today.  In 2005 republicans said a majority is a majority and reconciliation is within the rules.  

And, during that same year, Democrats, including Barack Hussein Obama, whimpered and whined about the nuclear option as a blatant power grab, with Biden claiming that they would never resort to such, should the Democrats regain power.

[MCWAY]

Never said it was okay just that republicans have defended it during the last admin so how can you complain now? 

Because, the Republicans didn't use it in 2005 and they didn't do so to pass something that the American people CLEARLY, EMPHATICALLY DO NOT WANT!!

[kcballer]

Because, the Republicans didn't use it in 2005 and they didn't do so to pass something that the American people CLEARLY, EMPHATICALLY DO NOT WANT!!

Whether they used it or not is not the point here.  They defended saying 51 votes and you win.  Period.  If the Dems have 51 votes and pass it, it's a win.  The republicans can get upset all they want it's using the same rules they have used and defended before.