Archive for February, 2010

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHqhCbxu2wk]

The President and Republicans sparred over health care in yesterday’s “bipartisan” meeting. One of Republicans’ favorite talking points is so-called “tort reform”- or restricting patients’ ability to hold negligent doctors and hospitals accountable for injuries they cause. They argue that liability limits will reduce health care costs.

The news out of Texas is that its comprehensive liability restrictions have not lowered costs at all. Despite its efforts to shield bad doctors, Texas health care costs have risen dramatically over the last six years.

Access to court is the only way that individuals can hold more powerful, sophisticated industries, such as doctors and hospitals accountable for wrongdoing.

Public Citizen sent a letter to Congress yesterday urging that it not include malpractice system changes in the health care bill, and to focus instead on the patient safety crisis facing the country.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iR1IsOUkiW0]

Recently, a financial industry lobbyist said because Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) is retiring, he is now free to “dance with the special interests that brought him to the dance in the first place. Us, his loyal donors in the banking community.”

Nearly 46,000 concerned Americans joined Public Citizen and our partners in saying, “No way!” Dodd is now free to do the right thing and hold the banksters accountable.

Americans for Financial Reform, Credo, Consumer Watchdog and the Center for Media and Democracy helped collect signatures. Together, we urged Dodd to keep up the fight for significant financial reform to rein in Wall Street and prevent another economic crisis. In particular, we called on Dodd to ensure there is a strong and independent Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

Continue Reading

No longer are policy makers claiming that large leaps in health care costs are due to malpractice lawsuits. It is now the fear of litigation, according to a memorandum released by Public Citizen
Doctors are finding it necessary to practice ‘defensive medicine,’ ordering excessive tests and procedures for patients.

Let’s look at the facts:

  • In 1999 it was reported that between 44,000 and 98,000 people die every year due to avoidable medical mistakes, according to the Institute of Medicine.
  • In 2004 it was estimated that more than 190,000 people die annually due to medical mistakes, according to hospital rating company HealthGrades.

Patient Safety is a problem. An alarmingly big problem.

  • Avoidable medical mistakes are reported to amount to between $17-29 billion in costs every year, according to IOM’s 1999 report
  • Enforcing just 10 patient safety measures would save a $35 billion per year, according to Public Citizen 2009 study

With the statistics laid out it is easy to see that something should be done to hold the doctors and hospitals responsible for these outstanding costs. Why then is the problem being pushed as litigation and the proposed outcome resting with reducing patients’ legal rights?

The memorandum clearly illustrates key points that demonstrate the problem lies within the current medical malpractice litigation system.

The tough problem needs to be addressed. Patients are not receiving the correct amount if at all of compensation for medical malpractices. The current payments are at an all-time low and are only for serious outcomes. What is even more disturbing is that nothing is being done to prevent more medical errors in the future.

Public Citizen stated it best, “Policymakers from both parties should set their partisan instincts aside and reduce patients’ needs to seek redress instead of limiting their rights to it.”

After the disastrous ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, the corporate lobby is gearing up to take down state laws designed to limit corporate influence and corruption in government.

In Minnesota, state law says it is illegal for corporations to try to influence elections by funding campaigns to defeat or endorse candidates. Now the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce is suing to make Minnesota’s laws line up with the Supreme Court’s decision to open the floodgates to corporate cash.

Twenty-three other states have made it a priority to limit corporate influence in elections, and all will likely see similar challenges from the Chamber and other groups that are all-too-eager to use their new power in an effort to defeat progressive candidates.  

Meanwhile, bills in states like Iowa and Maryland are moving forward to prevent corporate money from overwhelming the peoples’ voice in their elections, but all will face serious challenges.

Sadly, Columbia Law School professor and election-law expert Nathaniel Persily is right when he says the states’ powers are limited to ”nip[ping] at the edges to make it more difficult for corporations to spend this kind of money.”  And that’s why we need a constitutional amendment to prevent corporations from dominating our elections.

Continue Reading

In case you missed Anyone Can Whistle, the humbling and inspiring event celebrating the crucial role of whistleblowers in American society, you can watch the entire two-hour event online. If you don’t have time to see the entire video right away, be sure to watch the enlightening segment featuring Public Citizen’s Angela Canterbury (it begins at about 01:14:00).

© Copyright . All Rights Reserved.