Taken From
Democrat Talk Radio
Republican lies soared to new heights as they
passed the badly flawed bill that heavily favors
HMO's. Repubs are counting on the short memory
of Americans in the name of "getting something
done" (Dick Army).
The right to sue for unlimited damages is the only tool available to stop the suffering and death
of thousands, caused by HMO delay's of care and denial of care to policy holders. As always,
profits for HMO's are more important to Repubs
than lives of American citizens.
This fight has been going on for over 5 years.
the repubs have blocked all true reform of HMO's
solely because of thier financial contributions
to RNC coffers. This cannot stand.
~~~~~
What Congress and the Republicans have just done is gave the HMO's a number that their bean counters can work with......now they know the limitation of thier liability, and if the treatment costs more than the lawsuit.........
~~~~~
Texans had the opportunity to sue the last pants off of HMOs, and yet the HMOs still flourish in Texas.
Under the new bill, (if it passes), the accountant will really compare the cost of the damages paid in case the lawsuit is won by the patient, with the costs of the treatment, and will implement the lesser evil.
I do not think that there ought to be a cap on damages. If you have no way to defend yourself, they will not only deny the treatment, but will also laugh all the way to the bank, walking by the cemetary where you will be burying your loved one to whom the treatment was denied.
~~~~~
I will probably sound silly here, but personally I think that country as wealthy as ours, is ready for universal health care. This would solve the HMO problem... What I really mean to say, is that medical care should be the basic right of every citizen, not the privilege of the wealthy or the insured.
~~~~~
HMO's are corporations designed to perform a service to tier members. However, like all corporations, they are not in business to lose money. They have employees to pay, overhead costs, drug and equipment costs, and they have stockholders to keep happy.
They are a business, pure and simple....and the bottom line in all businesses is the bottom line.
As I alluded to in my above post....what this lawsuit cap has done is given the financial decision makers in those organizations a number to go with.....basically a value on human life.
If the costs of care and rehabilitation for a chronic disease would outweigh the costs of any potential lawsuits, there would be no reason that the HMO would go the extra mile to save the patient, and cost the company more money in the long run, is there?
Is it just me who remembers, not too many years ago, that HMOs and Medical Insurance companies would just arbitrarily drop patients whom they considered would be too expensive to maintain? With this track record, how can we, the American people even consider trusting these entities, now that they have a limitation to their liabilities?
Isn't it a constitutional right that any American can sue any one else for redress for a wrong? My liability for a lawsuit is only determined by my assets, and, in some cases, my future earnings potential. Why should these corporations be afforded more protections than I am (or you are, for that matter)?
Lets take for instance Pacific Health Care. I am not saying that this is a bad company....but it was one that I found the information on, readily. PHC has a current market capitalization of $510.9MM, and annual revenues of about $12 billion (expanding on Q1, 2001 revenues). They were able to pay their CEO $728K (no mention of bonuses), and were able to give their stockholders a 55% dividend.
Now, tell me why, if this company were to cause the death of a loved one, through neglect or malpractice, that their liability should be limited to 1/10000 of their company revenues, 3/1000 of their market capital, and only double what they pay their CEO (not counting bonuses)?
I guess we have finally put a value on human life in this country. $1.5M, or 7% of what Halliburton gave Dick Cheney as a severance package.
~~~~~
only in bush's america..just think your hmo can make life of death decisions without very much risk at all..without enforcement you have no rights
would your hmo pay for a heart device like mr cheneys?.i doubt it very much ..mine wont
Democrat Talk Radio
Republican lies soared to new heights as they
passed the badly flawed bill that heavily favors
HMO's. Repubs are counting on the short memory
of Americans in the name of "getting something
done" (Dick Army).
The right to sue for unlimited damages is the only tool available to stop the suffering and death
of thousands, caused by HMO delay's of care and denial of care to policy holders. As always,
profits for HMO's are more important to Repubs
than lives of American citizens.
This fight has been going on for over 5 years.
the repubs have blocked all true reform of HMO's
solely because of thier financial contributions
to RNC coffers. This cannot stand.
~~~~~
What Congress and the Republicans have just done is gave the HMO's a number that their bean counters can work with......now they know the limitation of thier liability, and if the treatment costs more than the lawsuit.........
~~~~~
Texans had the opportunity to sue the last pants off of HMOs, and yet the HMOs still flourish in Texas.
Under the new bill, (if it passes), the accountant will really compare the cost of the damages paid in case the lawsuit is won by the patient, with the costs of the treatment, and will implement the lesser evil.
I do not think that there ought to be a cap on damages. If you have no way to defend yourself, they will not only deny the treatment, but will also laugh all the way to the bank, walking by the cemetary where you will be burying your loved one to whom the treatment was denied.
~~~~~
I will probably sound silly here, but personally I think that country as wealthy as ours, is ready for universal health care. This would solve the HMO problem... What I really mean to say, is that medical care should be the basic right of every citizen, not the privilege of the wealthy or the insured.
~~~~~
HMO's are corporations designed to perform a service to tier members. However, like all corporations, they are not in business to lose money. They have employees to pay, overhead costs, drug and equipment costs, and they have stockholders to keep happy.
They are a business, pure and simple....and the bottom line in all businesses is the bottom line.
As I alluded to in my above post....what this lawsuit cap has done is given the financial decision makers in those organizations a number to go with.....basically a value on human life.
If the costs of care and rehabilitation for a chronic disease would outweigh the costs of any potential lawsuits, there would be no reason that the HMO would go the extra mile to save the patient, and cost the company more money in the long run, is there?
Is it just me who remembers, not too many years ago, that HMOs and Medical Insurance companies would just arbitrarily drop patients whom they considered would be too expensive to maintain? With this track record, how can we, the American people even consider trusting these entities, now that they have a limitation to their liabilities?
Isn't it a constitutional right that any American can sue any one else for redress for a wrong? My liability for a lawsuit is only determined by my assets, and, in some cases, my future earnings potential. Why should these corporations be afforded more protections than I am (or you are, for that matter)?
Lets take for instance Pacific Health Care. I am not saying that this is a bad company....but it was one that I found the information on, readily. PHC has a current market capitalization of $510.9MM, and annual revenues of about $12 billion (expanding on Q1, 2001 revenues). They were able to pay their CEO $728K (no mention of bonuses), and were able to give their stockholders a 55% dividend.
Now, tell me why, if this company were to cause the death of a loved one, through neglect or malpractice, that their liability should be limited to 1/10000 of their company revenues, 3/1000 of their market capital, and only double what they pay their CEO (not counting bonuses)?
I guess we have finally put a value on human life in this country. $1.5M, or 7% of what Halliburton gave Dick Cheney as a severance package.
~~~~~
only in bush's america..just think your hmo can make life of death decisions without very much risk at all..without enforcement you have no rights
would your hmo pay for a heart device like mr cheneys?.i doubt it very much ..mine wont
