Letters to the Editor: Use Actual Data to Verify Results

» 2 Comments | Post a Comment



Use Actual Data To Verify Results
Editor, Times-Dispatch: The editorial, "Tort Retort," depends for its validity on a Congressional Budget Office estimate that $54 billion would be saved by restricting legal responsibility for medical error through tort reform.

One factor is an assumed monetary savings by "lowering insurance premiums" although no explanation is given of how insurance companies would be persuaded to lower premiums -- unless malpractice insurance was rendered unnecessary by completely eliminating legal responsibility.

Neither do we have any idea whether savings to physicians would be reflected in lower medical costs or health insurance costs. Unless a complete repeal of civil litigation is intended, a much more accurate and readily available measure exists. Many state laws provide for restrictions on malpractice recovery. I have read that Virginia's laws are the strongest. It would be easy to compare medical costs here and in the other reformed states against those states that have lesser degrees of restriction or none at all.

A similar measure can be applied to nonessential procedures and tests. This too would depend on complete absence of legal responsibility. I have been nagged, and even browbeaten by medical personnel to subject myself to innately dangerous medical testing despite an absence of necessity for the procedures. Again, however, empirical evidence could show us whether this happens more frequently in states without tort reform.

I am not impressed by the abstracts of the CBO. Let's see some actual records of actual practices and results.

Patsy Anne Bickerstaff.
Richmond.



Cutesy Name Doesn't Fit Macho Game
Editor, Times-Dispatch: So the team management went with the Flying Squirrels. They're cute little timid, defenseless creatures, but a poor symbol for a macho, competitive sports team. It smacks of Rocky and Bullwinkle.

It's hard enough to have a Double A baseball team survive in this town. Do they really believe fans will take the Flying Squirrels seriously?

Don Park.
Sandy Hook.



Anti-Drilling Op/Ed Was Way Off Base
Editor, Times-Dispatch: How can Marirose Pratt's Op/Ed column, "Offshore Drilling Is No 'Silver Bullet'," be so wrong? I'll give her credit for the call for more efficiency -- we waste about 20 percent of our energy.

She claims that offshore drilling will take 30 years to be effective. Hogwash. We can't predict out 30 years. If permitted, oil will flow within three or four years and will create 160,000 high-paying jobs within 20 years, and raise $1.7 trillion in revenue (American Petroleum Institute).

Pratt talks of polluting spills, but the U.S. has a 99.999 percent safety record on offshore drilling, according to the U.S. Energy Administration -- despite our oil wells being located in hurricane territory. More oil bubbles up from natural seepage than from drilling. In fact, drilling would reduce the seepage as it would relieve the pressure on the oil and gas structures.

She claims that only six days of oil are available off the coast of Virginia and then goes on to say that the facilities needed to handle all of this would burden the coastal communities. These facilities would furnish their own protection, safety, and operating resources -- and pay a lot of taxes.

Pratt is for renewables, yet simple arithmetic will show that there is no future in wind and solar -- despite massive government subsidies. It would take 50 square miles of collectors, or 1,000 windmills, to equal our North Anna nuclear facility.

She claims that fishing would be adversely affected, but the oil rigs are where the fishermen go to fish. And so it goes.

The horizon is three miles from shore and the oil rigs will be many more miles out -- completely out of sight (acknowledgments to National Review).

Corbin Dixon.
Staunton.



Who Says Truckers Are Under-Taxed?
Editor, Times-Dispatch: In response to the letter from Urchie Ellis, "Pay for Highways Through User Fees," and on behalf of the trucking companies in Virginia: Truckers pay many taxes and fees, of which some people may not be aware.

It starts with a federal excise tax of at least 10 percent paid when a new truck is purchased. For any truck having a taxable gross weight of 55,000 pounds or more, there is a Heavy Vehicle Tax paid to the U.S. Treasury -- which is in addition to the registration fees paid to the Department of Motor Vehicles. These fees range from $1,000 to $1,300 registration per truck. Both the Heavy Vehicle Tax and the registration are paid annually.

For any trucks that haul interstate, there is the International Fuel Tax Agreement, quarterly tax return, charging 3.5 percent per gallon on fuel used in Virginia. There are different rates for other states. Remember, trucks have already paid a state tax of .1750 and a federal tax of .2440 when the fuel was purchased.

Therefore, although the annual amounts of $10 per truck for IFTA decals and $806 for 21 to 100 trucks seem small, it is yet another tax or registration fee on the so-called under-taxed truckers. And don't forget -- we pay personal property taxes just like everyone else. J.R. Tharpe, J.R. Tharpe Trucking, Inc.


Burkeville.

Advertisement

 
View More: letters to the editor,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by Boomerang on October 28, 2009 at 6:25 pm

Re: “Cutesy Name Doesn’t Fit Macho Game”

The one redeeming thing about baseball is that it’s *not* macho!  Just because it’s a men’s team does not make it macho.

And I’m not so sure about flying squirrels as “cute little defenseless creatures.“  That description may apply to chipmunks, hamsters & gerbils, but it certainly doesn’t apply to another member of the rodent family: the rat.

Yes, the name Flying Squirrels smacks of Rocky and Bullwinkle.  And that’s the real point—the name is childish, and a poor symbol for an *adult* sports team.

Flag Comment Posted by thetruth on October 28, 2009 at 12:18 pm

Tort Reform Factor; or is it?:  “One factor is an assumed monetary savings by “lowering insurance premiums” although no explanation is given of how insurance companies would be persuaded to lower premiums.”...A good, but seldom asked question.

Naïve people still do not understand the only goal of the Family of Five major U.S. health insurance companies; to make more money, the amount of which is never enough. 

To provide clarity, consider the financial institutions “too big to fail”.  Most current, although small in comparison to amount, is reported by today’s WSJ headline:  “GMAC Asks for Fresh Lifeline”.  Our Treasury injected (medical term?) $5 billion into GMAC in Dec 2008, $7.5 billion this past May, and under consideration is $2.8 to $5.6 billion.  Small stuff vs. bailouts for AIG, Bank of America, and others.

Family of Five insurance companies indirectly are under a bailout umbrella continually.  R-Mitch O’Connell months ago spoke the truth of loyalty when the topic of non-profit insurance option first arose.  He said, “insurers would not be able to compete”.  Thus, his first priority; insurers and not the citizens of America.  No doubt, insurer $ contributions popped up first in his noggin.  O’Connell spoke for the entire GOP and some among Dems who put campaign contributions ahead of financial (and health) well-being of Americans.

Per WSJ on Sept 3, total cost of tort insurance, settlements, the whole enchilada, is little more than 1% of all the health care system’s cost.  If it was reduced to just over one-half %, would insurers lower premiums even one tenth %?  Course not.  They are thieves feeding on the sick and dying.

When do your premiums go up?  Jan 1 or July 1?  10%+?  Employer pays for it?  Ask him/her % of last increase and % come Jan 1, as notice will be soon.  Remember.  Insurer’s increases come before any pay increase you might get.  Who do you support most?  Your insurer or yourself?

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement