From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell)
Subject: Re: SC rally: "We don't want a draft dodger for president!"
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 13:18:07 GMT

mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>In article <farenebt.716352807@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:
>>mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>>>In article <farenebt.716237519@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:

>>All right, let me ask you this, could you propose a better system? 

>Well, first off, let's make sure that we're all clear that Bri has
>conceded my point.  We do have to pay for it and it does affect all of
>us.  Don't let people claim that government paid helath care is free
>because it damned well isn't.

All right, I do concede your point that we all have to pay for it. I have
yet to concede that Clinton's plan is a bad idea, however.

>Now, can I propose a better system?  Bet your ass.  The key is to hit

You're one step ahead of George Bush.

>the things that make it cost.


>I.  Too many lawyers.
>II.  Too few doctors.
>III.  Overuse of the system.
>IV.  Irrational use of the system.
>V.  Unhealthy habits

>I.  Too many lawyers... steps to fix it.

>A.  If one side in a malpractice suit offers to settle for $X and the
>other side refuses and the eventual judgement is for less than $X then
>the side that refused to settle must pay the other side's court costs.
>For example, if you sue me for $1,000,000 and I offer to settle for
>$500,000 but you refuse and the eventual judgment is $400,000 you have
>to pay my court costs.

>B.  Jurors can assess punitive damages against the PLAINTIFF if they
>feel the suit is frivolous.

>C.  Guidelines for the amount of damages for different kinds of cases.
>Judges are expected to alter the jury award if it is out of line
>unless there are extraordinary circumstances.

>D.  If a lawyer takes a case on a contingency basis and the eventual
>judgment is that his side must pay then he is responsible for a share
>of the judgement.  For example, if I sue you and my lawyer does it for
>40% of any money received but the jury says I have to pay you $100,000
>for a frivolous suit then my lawyer has to pay $40,000 of it.

>E.  If the judge thinks there is a good chance of a judgment against
>the plaintiff he can require the plaintiff to post bond before suing.

>F.  Elimination of deep-pockets lawsuits - defendants pay a share of
>the eventual judgment based on their percentage responsibility, not
>based on ability to pay.

All excellent ideas.

>II.  Too few doctors... steps to fix it

>A.  Let in foreign doctors and tell the AMA to stick it.

>III.  Overuse of the system...

>A.  Encourage significant deductibles in insurance plans - for example
>50% of the first $1000, 10% of the next $3,000, and 1% of anything
>more each year.  Nothing should be free.

As you stated above, Clinton's plan wouldn't be free; we'd be paying for
it with our tax dollars...and we'd be getting the benefits.

>IV.  Irrational use of the system...

>A.  Prioritize procedures ala Oregon.  Encourage plans not to pay for
>the stuff below the cutoff.

I don't believe that people are overusing the system but this item
couldn't hurt. Plus it would appease the insurance lobby.

>V.  Unhelathy habits...

>A.  Encourage plans to pay wellness benefits.  Do the same for welfare
>and other federal assistance.


>If you do all this then healthcare will be cheap again and we won't
>need to have all this whining and screming about national health care
>plans.

I hope so. However, you are neglecting to mention one of the biggest
costs in medical care, drugs (are you neglecting to mention it or am
I missing something?). In the 1980's, drug costs went up something like
20 times the rate of inflation (don't quote me on the exact number). That
is probably the biggest single contributing factor (or at least one of the
biggest) in the high medical bills Americans have to face today.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BRI FARENELL			      	   "America needs leaders, not labels."
CLARKSON '95				    	---Ronald Reagan, 8/8/92
FARENEBT@CRAFT.CAMP.CLARKSON.EDU  	    
A PC-HATING, PRO-LIFE, LIBERAL CARD-CARRYING ACLU MEMBER
=============================================================================
"We are not descended from fearful men...not men who feared to write, to
speak, to associate and to defend causes which were for the moment 
unpopular."		---Edward R Murrow

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.elections