Pocket-lining Litigation Should be Avoided in Opioid Epidemic
Pocket-lining Litigation Should be Avoided in Opioid Epidemic
Pocket-lining Litigation Should be Avoided in Opioid Epidemic
Have you ever known someone who promises one thing and delivers another? It’s pretty disappointing, isn’t it? You wouldn’t buy a bag of chips expecting to find it full of leaves when you get home. Most folks would go back and demand a refund if that happened. Yet, this is exactly what is happening with some legislation working its way through Congress. Compared to what people really want, what our legislators deliver leaves much to be desired. It’s enough to make one wonder who really employs Congress: people like you and me, or corporations and big money?
House Republicans have spent a long time damning Barack Obama’s Affordable Healthcare Act. With Donald Trump in office and a majority in both chambers of Congress, the right-wing has already begun confidently chipping away at patient rights and protection. A newly-introduced bill, H.R. 1215, proposes punishing Americans who aren’t privately insured by capping medical malpractice
Casual readers skimming the headline of a recent Washington Times opinion piece, “Protecting consumers from swindlers,” would be forgiven for assuming the author advocated cracking down on scammy businesses. After all, with the new administration taking aim at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and legislation like Dodd-Frank, consumers need all the protection they can get. Alas, the “swindlers” in the article aren’t businesses that cheat customers, but the lawyers who take them on. The Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017, sponsored by Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), would limit the scope of class action lawsuits to bring justice for vast numbers of injured consumers.
It was one of the rallying cries of the recent election season, and so many others. Government, folks say, should act like a business. Businesses are inherently better and more efficient, and gosh darn it, people like them. That’s one reason Americans hired a “successful” businessman to turn government around. All of this sounds really reasonable, too, if you don’t think too much about the details. Unfortunately, those details are where the proverbial devil resides.
Now that the new administration plans to throw healthcare back on the table, we’ll surely hear once again about the virtues of tort reform. A perennial conservative salve for seemingly every economic ill, tort reform reduces peoples’ ability to seek redress in court. Hypothetically, tort reform serves as a counterbalance against what the business community
Since Trump’s election, there has been a lot of talk from Republicans about repealing the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and implementing a plan of their own with tort reform. But why tort reform? Well, many GOP leaders, including Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan and HHS Secretary-designate Tom Price (R-GA) believe there is a medical malpractice
The proposed regulation would not completely ban the practice in its entirety, but instead force to add a section that states that the arbitration procedures do not apply if a complaint has been certified by a judge for class-action litigation. Codrary said about the provision, “Under this proposed approach, consumers would again get their day in court to hold companies accountable for potential wrongdoing. We think that’s quite important.” The rule would also require companies to publicly post which claims have been brought to arbitration and the awards issued.
Full disclosure, Mr. Lane asked me to look into the 52-page report created by the Chamber’s “Institute for Legal Reform,” but the results that I found were absolutely shocking, and the opinions I have about this absolute piece of garbage are my own.