re: #369 iceweasel

hey subsailor! You’re absolutely right that it’s ridiculous that tort reform was never even on the table. Just crap. From some of the figures I’ve seen though, it wouldn’t bring the costs down as much as we’d think. Apparently it makes up a (relatively) small percentage of overall costs.
One huge worry is that the bulk of the costs currently all come from administrative costs. So there is a very serious worry about whether the reform is going to result in streamlining those costs, or adding even more bureauocracy.

But as to your last bit, my understanding is that it isn’t solely about solving that problem, but providing care for all the uninsured (and underinsured). In that instance, the REAL worry is all about the difficulty of getting an accurate count of the uninsured. The bottom line is that we don’t have an accurate count. The low ball estimates are (i think) around 15 million; the reasonable top end estimate is 38 million. And that’s the single biggest consideration in determining how much it’s going to cost, because if the number of the uninsured (who qualify for the subsidises to help pay for their insurance) turns out to be much greater than what’s estimated, the plan will cost us much more. If it’s much lower, then it will cost us less.

How much of those “administrative costs” are due to fear of lawsuits? All those ‘i’s” dotted and “t’s” crossed in triplicate —is it really necessary?