What is it with GOP responders?
The Republican response to President Obama’s speech to a joint session of Congress was delivered tonight by Rep. Charles Boustany of Lousiana. As Rep. Boustany practiced medicine for twenty years as a cardio-thoracic surgeon before running for Congress, no doubt the Republicans saw him as a fitting representative coming directly from the front lines of the health care system.
You’d have thought that the GOP would have learned their lesson about Louisiana politicians when Gov. Bobby Jindal tucked us all in after Obama’s State of the Union with his impression of Big Bird from Sesame Street. Apparently not.
One of the primary objections of Congressional Republicans to the health reform initiative has been the failure of Democrats to stand up to the trial lawyers and take on medical malpractice. The GOP claims that doing away with medical malpractice claims will take a huge cost bite out of the health care system, despite the fact that the actual cost of these lawsuit runs somewhere between .5% to 2% of our national healthcare expenditure. Still, Obama threw them a bone during his speech, promising to institute some trials in a few states to see how to deal with the problem.
So who better to deliver the minority party response than a physician turned congressman who has been sued three times for medical malpractice, lost twice and settled out of court the third time?
In a 2000 case, Geraldine Arceneaux, the sheriff of Carencro, La., was awarded $1.2 Million in damages from a state compensation fund after complications emerged following a 1997 bypass surgery by Boustany and a team of physicians at Lafayette General Medical Center.
In 1992, Melanie Malagarie sued Boustany’s team for medical malpractice stemming from surgery performed on her young daughter, who underwent two surgeries for a condition called Tetrology of Falot — the second resulting in complications. Again, the state review panel found in the patient’s favor, awarding the family $600,000 in damages through the compensation fund.
Three years later, another Boustany patient, Delila Hays, sued him after complications arising from an angioplasty which resulted in the amputation of several toes, according to documents. The medical panel didn’t rule on the case but an unspecified settlement was paid out after mediation, the documents show.
Little wonder Rep. Boustany would like to see some serious malpractice reform.
Ah…but it gets so much better. So much so that these are the moments that make life worth living.
Apparently, the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana was not sufficiently satisfied to be called the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana. He needed something…you know…snappier.
All of this should remind of when Boustany got fleeced out of $68,500 with an investment and a pathetic attempt to purchase a British title of nobility. He wanted to be called “Lord Boustany.”
VIA www.whereboustany.com
Not believing this could possibly be true, I dug further only to discover…yes, it’s true. He really did try to buy a British title.
Seriously. Where do the Republicans find these people to represent them before the entire nation and how is it possible that this party is standing between the American people and health care reform?
Oh…and Obama’s speech was great. I figured you already knew this but thought I should mention it.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
And to think – these are the losers Obama was supposed to be reaching out to. Like Rep. Joe Wilson, who yelled “You lie” during the speech. In my dream world, Obama would have done one of two things:
1. Turned in the direction of the yell and said, “Who said that?!?” Then he would have called Wilson up to the front and embarrassed him in front of the “class” by making him defend his claim.
2. The President would have said, “Come up here and say that to my face, mother fucker!”
I do have to say, though, the man can give a speech! But I’m still with Allison on this.http://trueslant.com/allisonkilkenny/2009/09/09/obamas-solution-is-to-pay-the-enemy/#more-1518
We’ll see what’s in the final bill.
Mark- yeah, I was kind of hoping he would kick Wilson’s ass.
In response to another comment. See in context »At least Wilson didn’t throw his shoe. Maybe next time, we can hope.
In response to another comment. See in context »Again all they can do is lie!
“Replacing your family’s current health care with government-run health care is not the answer” Replace?
“without destroying jobs, exploding the deficit, rationing care, or taking away the freedom American families cherish.” Rationing? Taking away freedoms?
The GOP is bankrupt. The Democrats know this and Obama called out the GOP tonight to put up or shut up. Now it is up to the Democrats to have the courage to get the best plan that 60 people in the Senate can vote for and move on to get it passed ASAP; The House will follow. The longer they wait the more lies the GOP will come up with. Representative Joe Wilson owes Obama and the American people an apology!
When there is little left in barrel how can you not end up scraping the bottom?
remarkable, isn’t it?
In response to another comment. See in context »When grown-ups in powerful positions (like Rep. Wilson) act with such malice and disrespect (not to mention immaturity), is it any wonder why children bully one another? Bill Milliken says, “We don’t have a youth problem here in the US, what we have are adult problems.” Get real, grow up!!
You’re great, Rick. That bit about trying to by the title ‘Lord’– that is rich!!! Keep it coming!
Whitney
Thanks, Whitney!
In response to another comment. See in context »I will say one thing for Rep. Wilson – when he staged his ’shout out” it kind of sounded like Prime Minister’s questions in the British House of Commons which is something I love. Every week, the Prime Minister has to show up at the House of Commons and be abused. I always liked that system and thought it wouldn’t be a bad idea to have it here.
So true!!! But can you imagine if Bush had been presiding over one of the Britain-type meetings?!? Oh heaven!! No speech writers to fall back on, just his wits?
I lived in London right after he was elected, and even the most conservative of my Brit friends were like, “You elected someone who got C’s and D’s in college? You Americans are daft!” And I agree.
In response to another comment. See in context »Actually, it was during Bush’s term that I first thought about how cool it would be if he had to face the Congress every week. It would have been hysterical!
In response to another comment. See in context »Hey Rick
First off I agree with the PM Questions, we should have our highest elected official on the hot seat every once in a while, seeing a HoC PM Questions broadcast always stops me from channel surfing…
however, a speech to a joint session of Congress is not the time or place for heckling and Wilson lacked serious judgment in doing so. It is like the GOP is purposely trying to paint themselves further into a corner. This week alone you had the ridiculous hysteria over the school speech (how does a conservative protest a speech on self responsibility anyway?)and now Wilson’s outburst. They are seemingly fulfilling the prophecy that they are a party of angry obstructionist intent on power only with no real regard for the nation.
Anyway, Wilson’s political career is done. He only won by 8 points last election and his former opponent is running against him again, an ex-Marine named Rob Miller. Last night Miller raised $88,000 after the Wilson outburst. Because of the recent tight race and a desire to strike deep into the southland Wilson already has a DNC target on his back, now, because of his disrespecting the President that target will be bigger with ActBlue, MoveOn and KOS piling on.
Agreed. And, yes, Wilson certainly appears to have shot himself in the foot. It wasn’t cool – I think he knows that now!
In response to another comment. See in context »Rick,
I agree. The speech given by the President was written and executed very well. Any reasonable person would recognize that. I am proud to have him as our president. I continue to be disillusioned by the right wing in this country. The arguments have become less intellectual and constructive. However, I think the discussion needs balance and reason. As a libertarian, I do want to see universal health care while minimizing the cost and size of its administration and make sure everyone contributes something to make it happen. We already have an abundance of do nothing jobs in government. We do not need more. The other part I don’t understand about you liberals is why do you love trial lawyers so much? So much effort is given to protect their parasitical livelihood. We need to cut costs everywhere in health care. The 1% to 2% is still a huge amount of money. The additional 7% or so in unnecessary defensive medical practices is even more costly. The president is wise in the spirit of compromise to include all constructive initiatives into the overall plan. So what if your money sponge friends may have do something more constructive than to chase ambulances around, that may actually be a good thing.
Sharkdb- hey, easy on the “parasitic livelihood” thing! I’m a lawyer, but not an ambulance chaser.
Actually, I have no problem whatsoever with taking steps to reduce the phony medical malpractice lawsuits in the system. I’ve long advocated that all such actions should have to first go through an independent medical board to insure there is a reasonable likelihood of success before these cases are permitted to go forward to trial. At the same time, I do think that people who are legitimately injured should have the opportunity to be made whole. Not scam the system – but be made whole. The parent of a child who is damaged for life as a result of an operation that goes wrong is going to have significantly higher costs involved when raising that child. They should be entitled to relief from this. not enriched foolishly, as many juries are quick to do, but given relief from these extra cost. Not unreasonable, yes?
By the way,you should know that the day of the ambulance chaser really has passed us by in this country. No lawyers want to touch cases involving older people and babies who die because there is no longer “pain and suffering” damages in most states. They can only win the actual, economic damages with a small amount of pain and suffering penalties (up to $250,000).
In response to another comment. See in context »Well, my opinion… No doubt, people who have been wronged should be compensated appropriately. Bad doctors should be kept from working if they botch something due to their incompetency. It should be criminal if it is negligence. High standards should abound considering those in responsible areas are already highly compensated. And I guess, for the most part, existing laws do this to some degree. The part I think that ruins it for me is knowing that the lawyer takes a huge chunk/percentage of the take for simply being the advocate. Large class action suits with lots of suffering complaintants get a small stipend of a settlement while the lawyers take home a much larger cut. John Edwards owes his career and millions in his pocket to an unfortunate little girl who got her stomach stuck on a pool drain. The sleeze bag could sway juries and audiences like no other until showing his true colors by cheating on his ailing wife. I have many personal accounts I would rather not share. Sorry, nothing personal, I just don’t like lawyers. Right up there with Wallstreet investment bankers.
sharkb – there is some truth in what you say. But – there are some things that you may not be considering. Lawsuits today are hugely expensive, involving hundreds of thousand dollars of costs and time. WHen lawyers take a case on a contingency, which is what you are speaking to, they take the risks on the costs. Thus, if they loose, they can be out hundreds of thousands of dollars that they can’t get back. But if they don’t take it on contingency, the injured plaintiffs would never be able to pursue their case which would also be incredibly unfair. This is a reality of American justice today. Bad – but real.
In California, we have pretty strong ethical rules which state how much a lawyer can take at the various stages of litigation. If a lawyer settles it early on they don’t get to take nearly the percentage they can receive if they take it all the way through trial, appeals, etc.
All that said, there are certainly some sleeze lawyers out thee who don’t do the work they should and just show up hoping to win and gain a huge percentage of the winnings. I deplore them every bit as much as you do.
In response to another comment. See in context »Thank you for your civil response despite the fact I denigrated your profession.
In response to another comment. See in context »