By David Arkush and Christine Hines
Jon Stewart, the popular host of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show and “America’s most trusted newsman,” regularly imparts an astute critique of American political affairs and media.
The comic’s recent two-part exchange with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, for instance, elicited – in between the funny jabs – thoughtful, nuanced discussion on policy, politics, and the president. As Daily Show fans though, we cringed a little during his chat with O’Reilly when they briefly discussed so-called “tort reform,” the phrase used by the health industry and big business to advocate taking away your access to the courts
O’Reilly first broached the issue when Stewart was a guest on Fox’s O’Reilly Factor. He complained that President Obama could have worked with Republicans during the health care reform debate by adding “tort reform” to the bill. Stewart shot back that the president said he was willing to compromise on the issue, a priority for Republicans, even though it wouldn’t save much in health care costs. In their second conversation, this time at the Daily Show. Stewart blasted the extent of corruption, in media and finances (financial services?), and then strangely expressed a willingness to offer “right wing tort reform,” as he called it. It wasn’t clear why he mentioned it. Perhaps to suggest he would bargain on the issue in exchange for measures that curb corruption.
We’re with him on the need to end corruption. Government and corporate accountability are at a serious low point; we’ve proposed and supported a number of important fixes ourselves, here and here, and here. But Stewart (and President Obama!) are wrong to say they would compromise on “tort reform.” That’s a little like saying you’re willing to compromise on the right to vote. Access to court when someone hurts you—whether the government, a business, or an individual—is a fundamental American right, and we’d all be in big trouble without it.
A willingness to sacrifice access to the courts is a risky suggestion, especially for patients injured at the hands of careless medical providers. If we leave patients exposed to a provider’s negligence, and then limit that provider’s responsibility to patients, the only sources left to pay for the patients’ injuries are patients and taxpayers (i.e. Medicare and Medicaid). But over half of personal bankruptcies are already caused by medical expenses, and Medicare and Medicaid spending are already skyrocketing. It’s much better to have a system in which people who cause harm pay for it, rather than sticking the victims or the taxpayers with the tab.
As it turns out, lawsuits are useful not just to the people who sue. They are being used by medical professionals to teach how to prevent future harm to patients.
The big corporations who fund the “tort reform” movement—like Exxon and BP, AIG, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—don’t want to make the courts work better; they only seek to profit. That means stopping people from holding them accountable for wrongdoing. They promote their positions through misleading studies, front groups, and massive campaign contributions and independent expenditures on elections. Talk about corruption.
Jumping on Stewart’s off-the-cuff comments may seem a little like nit-picking, and it probably is, but this is a serious issue that is too easily dismissed, even by progressives. If you ever find yourself squaring off against a corporate Goliath—or for that matter the government—access to court is your slingshot. Keep it by your side and don’t give it up.
David Arkush is director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. Christine Hines is the consumer and civil justice counsel for Public Citizen.
citizenvox.wordpress.com 
On target post! In fact, if you need an example of someone who was harmed by failure to diagnose, became destitute and is now being supported by taxpayers through Social Security Disability at age 56, use me, Doctorblue http://doctorblue.wordpress.com. From the age of 50-55, I spent all of my retirement funds and other assets believing I could find one doctor in the Washington, DC area with the knowledge and will to help me get well. I was naive. I should have spent it on attorneys filing a medical malpractice suit.
Now, with my only support $2000 a month in SSDI payments, finding a lawyer to represent me on a contingency basis is pie in the sky. I’ve been advised I need at least $50,000 to cover upfront administrative and witness expenses which are not considered a part of counsel’s contingency award and must be paid win or lose. By no longer having the funds to pursue justice, I feel like my rights as an American are being denied. At least the Virginia Supreme Court had the foresight to recognize such instances in deciding to toll the statute of limitations for those harmed by malpractice until treatment for the subject condition ends.
Based on my research, there are thousands of others just like me who became disabled at the hands of doctors and whose basic right to trial — to be heard — as citizens of the U.S. is being denied. We believed in a health care system that abandons the chronically ill largely due to doctors’ lack of knowledge and because our system dissects patients into an assemblage of non-interacting parts which are viewed statically by x-ray.
(What car mechanic can tell you what’s wrong with a car by looking at disassembled parts on the garage floor? Most of the good ones I know need to start the engine to tell what and where the problem is.)
In my case, doctors (some Washingtonian top doctors) confused the symptoms of an intestinal blockage with anxiety. The symptoms from internal bleeding ulcers were confused with non-existent drug use. So doctors prescribed drugs known to cause dementia if taken for an extended period as a fix for my “upset stomach” and “high anxiety.” And this madness continues for others on a daily basis.
After years of study, I correctly self-diagnosed and located knowledgeable surgeons at the Cleveland Clinic who performed the needed surgery paid for by Medicare this past February. Doctors estimate under the best scenario that recovery will take at least three years and some damage from not being diagnosed is irreversible.