From: sunder@altair.crhc.uiuc.edu (Srinivas Sunder)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: SC rally: "We don't want a draft dodger for president!"
Date: 13 Sep 1992 19:14:44 GMT
Organization: Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: altair.crhc.uiuc.edu

In article <1992Sep13.064122.16106@oracle.us.oracle.com>, mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
|> 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.
|> 
|> Now, can I propose a better system?  Bet your ass.  The key is to hit
|> 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.

In case nobody noticed, the Senate rejected a cloture motion on debate on
a bill that contained precisely this above provision, among other things.
Thanks due to, amongst others, Sen. Ernest Hollings, who is in the deep 
pockets of the trial lawyers. 

|> 
|> 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.

Amen. What's that phrase that is used to get someone with 5% liability to 
pay a 100% of the costs (the bill in the Senate would have eliminated this
too, btw) -- joint and several liability?

|> 
|> II.  Too few doctors... steps to fix it
|> 
|> A.  Let in foreign doctors and tell the AMA to stick it.

To give credit to a liberal where it is due, Sen. Paul Simon proposed
setting up of a national computer database for FMGs (Foreign Medical
Graduates) so that an FMG who moved from say, Illinois to Mass. didn't
have to go back home to get copies of every single document needed to
fulfill the licensing requirements of a new state. This was a couple
of years back. Never got anywhere though.


-- 
Srinivas Sunder                                         sunder@crhc.uiuc.edu

If my employer shares these views, I'd be most surprised.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion