Sunday, October 12, 2008
"According to Steve Forbes, and other tort reformers, the medical malpractice crisis is the fault of greedy plaintiffs and rapacious lawyers. The solution: caps on noneconomic damages. Since Calfornia adopted a $250,000 cap in 1975, 23 states have followed suit. What are the real-world consequences of such caps? The elderly, the poor, the unemployed and their surviving families are getting hurt in disproportionate numbers. ... Any suit that might require extensive discovery, the testimony of high-priced experts or protracted court proceeding can't get off the ground. ... [M]ost of the 'savings' (from the defendant's point of view) of damage caps come from wiping out the awards to negligently injured plaintiffs who could potentially win large noneconomic damages in court", David Hyman at Forbes, 15 September 2008.
Tort reform? "Let them eat cake", said Steve Forbes (SF), didn't he? Tort reform is designed to shield bad actors from the consequences of their actions. The "crits" are right. I can't stand SF, believing he was born with a proverbial platinum spoon in his mouth; a Princeton "legacy" admit. SF's contempt for Joe Sixpack is galling. Why should the poor have access to the courts anyway? Does SF favor a cap on defense lawyers fees? Say $85,000 per case to even the playing field? Well SF, how about it?