Remember Obama’s effort to try a “test” for tort reform? (We don’t actually need a test, since it has worked to lower medical malpractice coverage and help increase access to doctors in states that have tried it.) Well, Pelosi’s bill has an anti-tort-reform measure. On pages 1431-1433 of the 1990 spellbinder, there is a financial incentive for states to try “alternative medical liability laws.” But look — you don’t get the incentive if you have a law that would “limit attorneys’ fees or impose caps on damages.”
See Hot Air for more, including a link to the actual language and a reminder that the Democrats never had any intention of doing anything at all to disconcert trial lawyers. Which is the point that I’d like to hammer home, here: there is no reason to be surprised at this. We knew back in August that something like this was going to happen; and this is precisely the sort of political doubletalk that the people opposing the Democrats’ health care rationing bill have come to expect from the current ruling party.
So. To any random Democrats reading this: when Nancy Pelosi looks you in the eye and tells you that the new health care bill addresses tort reform, she is lying to you. Because she thinks that you are stupid.
She. Thinks. That. You. Are. Stupid.
Moe Lane
Crossposted to Moe Lane.
And she is right
RedBeard Saturday, October 31st at 10:10AM EDT (link)The only way Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi could possibly get elected is because of stupid voters.
The only reason the Constitution is under constant assault is due to stupid voters.
Socialism is rising because of stupid voters.
I would be more charitable and use the word ignorant instead of stupid, but ignorance is easily cured if the victim so desires. Continuing ignorance has no reason to exist, and leads right back to stupidity as the root cause.
Standard-bearer for grouchy curmudgeonry since, oh, 1975 or so.
But, Moe, she does address tort reform.
janis Saturday, October 31st at 10:47AM EDT (link)She just makes it quite plain that states can’t do it or they’ll pay a penalty. Sort of like a parent telling a teenager, “Yes, you can go to that party.” And then said parent makes it plain:
“But if you do, I’ll give away all your stuff and let somebody else move
into your bedroom.”
So elegant in its duplicity, so outrageously arrogant since that’s OUR money she’s choosing to withhold, stolen out of the hands of the ones who worked to produce it.
Absolutely
anotherindyfilmguy Saturday, October 31st at 1:42PM EDT (link)Her answer on tort reform is “We are addressing tort reform and the answer is NO if you want certain benefits from this bill AFTER your constituents have paid the taxes to support the total program”…
Simply evil…
Evil is a evil does…
Shades of 'Consumer Option'
lukematthews Saturday, October 31st at 11:02AM EDT (link)Unable to win an argument on its actual merits, the Regressives have opted to redefine the terms. They are so enamored with their rhetorical shifts, they can’t help themselves. Of course they think we are too stupid to notice such obvious garbage. That is the reason the idiotic bill is so huge. They are hoping that such a ponderous heap will force us to abandon the fight. Watch. They are going to argue that anything pointed out as poor policy is ‘dealt with’ on a different page or different section.
Here’s a shiny ball, here’s a shiny ball, don’t look at my other hand. I’m doing nothing. It’s empty, I swear.