Wednesday, March 12, 2003

Sen. Edwards won't help bar lawyer-enriching suits

Senator John Edwards of North Carolina is one of the latest Democrats to test the presidential election waters. He says that he represents "regular people." Edwards' notion of supporting these regular people means they must pay an invisible tax and hidden cost on everything they buy, or services they use, to pay for insurance against law suits brought by his fellow trial lawyers.

Columnist Bruce Bartlett reported in the March 3 Washington Times that this hidden cost was $721 a year for each citizen. Needless to say, Edwards is against tort reform that would ease these costs because it would mean smaller judgment awards to trial lawyers, who can make up to 35 percent to 40 percent of the cash award from these trials.

Such law suits extend from the ridiculous (the lady who won a suit against McDonald's because she spilled a hot cup of coffee on herself while driving) to the outrageous (West Virginia doctors going on strike because their malpractice insurance costs about 60 percent of their income). Tort reform mostly means that lawyers would get a smaller percentage of the judgment. Since trial lawyers give heavily to the Democratic Party, you might have determined that Edwards, who made millions in his practice and spent $3 million on his senatorial campaign, would not likely favor tort reform.

The scheme works like this: Democrats write vague laws (and regulations when they control the Executive Branch) which must be "interpreted" in the courts. Trial lawyers bring cases on behalf of clients who push the envelope of credibility for these laws and regulations. If they win the case they give a small percentage to the client, and they pocket the rest, with a payoff to the Democratic Party. Then the cycle repeats itself.

The consumer is the ultimate loser as insurance costs and the price of goods and services are increased to pay the additional demands for ever larger insurance premiums.

In many states, mostly those controlled by Democrat legislatures, tort laws make it easy for individuals, businesses and professionals (such as doctors) to be sued regardless of their responsibilities. (Doctors and other professional folks must not be "regular people.")

A surgeon in Florida can pay $200,000 a year for malpractice insurance. The same insurance in California is $70,000 where some award limits have been passed.

Plaintiffs should also have to pay all costs when a suit is found without merit. Currently, 70 percent of malpractice cases are found to be unjustified. Losing plaintiffs do not have to cover the costs of defendants whom they sue unsuccessfully, and insurance companies will often settle with plaintiffs, even when their clients are innocent, so long as the settlement is substantially less than the costs of a defense.

Reuters news agency reports that GM paid $4.5 billion for employee health care last year, more than the giant auto maker paid for steel. Much of that money goes indirectly to pay doctors' malpractice insurance, when it should be devoted to health care.

Congress just raised Medicare payments to doctors by $49 billion over the next 10 years, mostly to help defray the costs of malpractice insurance. That's $49 billion out or your pockets, the taxpayers.

Tort reform laws in some states have lead to lower insurance costs, as well as fewer "pass-along" expenses, like Medicare taxes, to the "regular people" who are the consumers of medical services. A bill has been introduced in the House, H.R. 5, that would cap liabilities awards to $250,000. This is a good start. Ask your congressman to support this bill.

Meanwhile, Edwards can neither convince anyone he is for regular people nor sell himself as a "moderate." Like Bill Clinton, he is running as something he is not. The leftist Americans for Democratic Action gave him, and Hillary Clinton, the same 95 percent approval rating for their 2001 voting record. The regular people remember Slick Willie and don't want a Slick Johnnie.

William Fielder

Peachtree City