AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

The point I've been making, and also Ican, is reducing malpractice costs will not increase healthcare costs, and all logic tells you that there will be savings if it is no more than the doctor won't need to raise his fees to upgrade his equipment.

Neither Ican nor I or anybody else arguing for tort reform thinks it will solve the healthcare problems. But the straight costs today are not the only problem and Texas and others have proved that tort reform does result in greater access to doctors and insurers and I doubt anybody can show how increased cmpetition in anything has not been effective in increasing options for people and/or reducing costs..

If TORT reform reduces our healthcare expenditures by 4% it will pay for the health insurance bill being discussed in congress ENTIRELY.

That make's it significant.

It may have kept costs in Texas from rising by almost 10%.

Of course, no one seems to want to try to figure out if TORT reform has done anything to help slow the increase in costs in Texas. We're all too busy having having a pissing contest.

Q. But critics of the current system say that 10 to 15 percent of medical costs are due to medical malpractice.

A. That’s wildly exaggerated. According to the actuarial consulting firm Towers Perrin, medical malpractice tort costs were $30.4 billion in 2007, the last year for which data are available. We have a more than a $2 trillion health care system. That puts litigation costs and malpractice insurance at 1 to 1.5 percent of total medical costs. That’s a rounding error. Liability isn’t even the tail on the cost dog. It’s the hair on the end of the tail.

It may have kept costs in Texas from rising by almost 10%.

Now in fairness, the rate of increase has slowed. Which gives credibility to the Right's assertion that malpractice claims are part of the problem...but it's obviously not the total solution. It's also not the ONLY factor that has contributed to the slower growth in premiums.

Other factors that have influenced the slower rate of growth for Missourians include wellness programs, coordination of benefits and use of a network of health care professionals. Some of the very same programs that have been touted by the Obama administration to control costs.

But not one of the hospitals or doctors interviewed for this article said they are cutting the prices they charge to patients or health insurers. Instead, they're reinvesting the savings in more and better health care.

For example, Denison-based Texoma Healthcare System, a 263-bed, five-facility system near the Oklahoma border, gave nurses a 17 percent raise, to $21 an hour from $18, chief executive Mackey Watkins said. This was to attract nurses during an ongoing national shortage.

i'd like to see tort reform discussed in a rational nonpartisan manner as well. (mebbe even some respect)

why don't you two start a real discussion about it?

(nothing much grows here, i think because of... well, you know...)

Of course, no one seems to want to try to figure out if TORT reform has done anything to help slow the increase in costs in Texas.

I don't necessarily think that re-investing the profits that doctors and hospitals are making back into improving health care is a bad idea.

Ignorance Joe. I don't 'insist' on doing it. I did think it was an acronym. Thank you for the enlightenment.

Anything else you'd like to discuss, aside from my gramatical errors?

On a side note:
Some people seem to really focus on trivial, inconsequential things. Why is that?