Factcheck.org - "A Final Weekend of Whoppers" Re Health Care Reform

[TomCADem]

Another post that purported to be to factcheck linked to an opinion piece trashing health care reform. Here is a link to the actual factcheck website for those who are interested. Here is an excerpt:

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/03/a-final-weekend-of-whoppers/

Medical malpractice is the biggest driver of health care spending.

Economic studies simply do not support this claim. Many Republicans strongly back limiting liability awards in medical malpractice cases, and it’s true that doing so would save money. The CBO said measures that conservatives have proposed would save $54 billion over 10 years and "reduce total U.S. health care spending by about 0.5 percent (about $11 billion in 2009)."

That’s real money, but it’s a tiny part of the more than $2 trillion spent on health care annually in the U.S. There’s disagreement over what exactly the biggest drivers of spending are, but medical malpractice doesn’t top the list. About 75 percent of spending, for instance, goes to taking care of chronic disease.

[thotzRthingz]

1. I agree... TORT REFORM will NOT significantly impact/lower costs... Why?

Because malpractice lawsuits are NOT the cause of rising costs. Although this article is dated... it is still true today and indicates what's really happening:

01 June 2005
Rising doctors' premiums not due to lawsuit awards - Study suggests insurers raise rates to make up for investment declines

Re-igniting the medical malpractice overhaul debate, a new study by Dartmouth College researchers suggests that huge jury awards and financial settlements for injured patients have not caused the explosive increase in doctors' insurance premiums.

The researchers said a more likely explanation for the escalation is that malpractice insurance companies have raised doctors' premiums to compensate for falling investment returns.

The Dartmouth economists studied actual payments made to patients between 1991 and 2003, the results of which were published yesterday in the journal Health Affairs. Some previous studies have examined jury awards, which often are reduced after trial to comply with doctors' insurance coverage maximums or because the plaintiff settles for less money to avoid an appeal. Researchers found that payments grew an average of 4 percent annually during the years covered by the study, or 52 percent overall since 1991, but only 1.6 percent a year since 2000.

<...snip...>

Meanwhile, malpractice insurance premiums for internists, general surgeons, and obstetricians have skyrocketed since 2000, jumping 20 to 25 percent in 2002 alone. In Massachusetts, ProMutual Group, which covers about one-third of the state's doctors, raised rates an average of 11 percent last year, 20 percent in 2003, and 12.5 percent in 2002.

<...snip...>

- source: http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2005/06/01/rising_doctors_premiums_not_due_to_lawsuit_awards/

IOW: it is, once again... INSURANCE COMPANY GREED, not malpractice lawsuit results, that are causing increases in COSTS.

K&R

[OhioChick]

2. "INSURANCE COMPANY GREED, not malpractice lawsuit results, that are causing increases in COSTS"

Agreed.

[branders seine]

3. "tort reform" is a red herring.

I've seen lots of misinformation on both sides. In fact, almost all I've seen is disinformation on both sides.