Lawsuit REDUCES Healthcare Costs for Patients

by: Drum Major Institute

Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:21


This blog post is the first in what will be an ongoing series by the folks at the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy. DMI is a public policy think tank that uses the lens of the middle class squeeze to analyze domestic policy on any issue from immigration to retro-active immunity for telecos. We think of ourselves  as a netroots think tank since one of the groups we develop policy tools for are bloggers. With that in mind I do want to ask the Open Left community for suggestions on what issues you'd like to hear from DMI about.

by Kia Franklin
You know all those lawsuits that conservatives like McCain blame for the high cost of healthcare? You know, the ones that actually have nothing to do with the high cost of healthcare? Well, the fact is that at least one lawsuit has actually reduced health care costs for a group of patients. A recent class action settlement resulted in refunds for low- and middle-income uninsured people who were overcharged for the care they paid for out-of-pocket.

Tuesday's settlement between patients and St-Louis health care provider BJC is a case-in-point for why our court system is an important and powerful tool that yields real results for real ordinary citizens facing real injustices. Uninsured patients allege that BJC hospitals overcharged them for all or some of their medical treatment, up to three times as much as their insured counterparts; denied uninsured patients access to the charity care that it was required to provide as part of its non-profit status; and used predatory collection practices when patients had trouble making payments.

According to this article:

BJC Healthcare, the area's largest health care system, will provide a 25 percent discount to all hospital patients without insurance under a class-action settlement agreement announced Tuesday. Some uninsured patients treated in the past also may be eligible for refunds or discounts.

Speaking to press, patients in the BJC class action expressed satisfaction:

"All in all, it's a fair agreement," said Dave Kuneman, one of the plaintiffs. "Agreements are never perfect for everyone. It's the best that Barnes and our class can do in the real world."

But this is not just a case in which the civil court system improved a difficult and unfair financial situation for individuals directly involved in the litigation. This case also had some positive reverberating effects on uninsured patients at neighboring health care providers. From the article:

Drum Major Institute :: Lawsuit REDUCES Healthcare Costs for Patients
Several area health care systems originally faced similar lawsuits or were threatened with them. Those hospital systems then began discounting prices to uninsured patients more aggressively...

Since then, hospitals across the country and the St. Louis area have made significant changes to their charity care policies...

Chip Robertson, an attorney representing the class, said Tuesday's settlement is a "serious attempt" by BJC to address the problem of the uninsured.

The civil courts are not just important for ensuring that individuals can find justice when they've been treated unfairly. Many lawsuits also have secondary effects that benefit whole communities, cities, and even the entire general public. In this way, the civil justice system-the system of public courts where plaintiffs bring these types of disputes-is an empowering tool for ordinary citizens.

Through the civil justice system, ordinary people have helped spark improvements in areas like product safety and medical treatment protocol. Their lawsuits have created incentives for corporations and other powerful entities to avoid litigation by improving the practices that would lead to litigation. In other words, lawsuits force powerful entities like corporations and even government agencies to consider the impact their actions will have on real human beings, and I'm not just talking about the individual human beings who stand to gain financially from the matter.

And why shouldn't lawsuits do this?

Most corporations are driven by the profit motive, not the moral motive. Obviously that doesn't mean corporations willfully go about seeking opportunities to harm people, but it can sometimes mean that human interests conflict with the bottom line.  For instance, a corporate polluter may fight litigation because punitive damages would cut into the corporation's profits. It could-and probably would-do this even if the devastation it caused truly warranted a stiff penalty. As the BJC lawsuit demonstrates, sometimes even non-profits are susceptible to this troubling tension.

Through the civil justice system, people can fight for their interest in living free of the harms that are caused when corporations fail to implement human values as they execute predominantly profit-motivated business practices. This is why, especially in light of efforts to limit our access to the courts, it is important to continue the dialogue on how to strengthen the civil justice system.
________________________________________________
DMI Civil Justice Fellow Kia Franklin is the editor ofTortDeform.com. She just released the report "Election '08: A pro-civil justice presidential platform".

 


Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

It's the people, stupid! (4.00 / 1)
The conservative right wing wants to ignore the impact that tort "reforms" will have on regular people. That's why it's important to pay attention to stories like this that tell the counternarrative about our legal system.

This lawsuit debate is not about trial lawyers, it's about the people who've been injured.

We've got to start challenging not just the positions (like the pro-tort reform position) but the presumptions behind the positions (that tort "reform" is about lawyers and frivolous lawsuits, instead of victims and corporate abusers).


good point (0.00 / 0)
the presumptions behind the positions (that tort "reform" is about lawyers and frivolous lawsuits, instead of victims and corporate abusers).

Corporations file frivolous lawsuits as a matter of course - look at SLAPP suits where developers sue communities that want environmental laws followed to try and bankrupt them. So it's not about frivolous lawsuits. And corporations suing corporations far outweigh citizen suits, so it's not about the number of lawsuits.

It is, like you say, about closing off an avenue for regular people to impact corporations with deep pockets.


[ Parent ]
good point (0.00 / 0)
Thanks much for your comment and insight. That's a really good point that people don't really talk about that so much. One of the dirty little secrets of the corporate world!  

[ Parent ]
open borders is not Progressive (0.00 / 0)
I went and saw just what kind of spin is being promoted on immigration policy and it's just twisted.  You have people who will most assuredly hurt the US worker, enable global labor arbitrage even further and propel the race to the bottom.  Ignoring labor economic realities on what happens with no immigration controls is just not Progressive.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


immigration (0.00 / 0)
Robert I'm familiar with your arguments and I don't want to get into some huge fight because I know I'm not going to make you see this differently after all of our back and forth but the reality is we are not going to suddenly have all of the undocumented workers in the US vanish or "self deport" or spend the infinite amount of money it would take to deport them.

So given that reality we need to make sure that the US doesn't have a two-tier labor market. The only way to do that is to bring undocumented workers into the economic mainstream by enforcing the workplace rights of ALL workers so that no one is being paid sweatshop wages or exploited.

Additionally we've seen what happens when localities kick out their immigrant populations-- they turn into ghost towns as local economies are damaged.

And that's not good for Americans.  


[ Parent ]
no (0.00 / 0)
It represses wages that's a fact and this is not an argument about "amnesty or no" as I've repeatedly said, it is about circumventing any controls on immigration policy whatsoever, which is what these groups are really arguing for.

Open borders, no controls, no interior enforcement is precisely want corporations want because it is global labor arbitrage on steroids.

So, this constant claim this is Progressive is pure bunk.  No one interested in US workers, the US middle class, American jobs subscribes to these sorts of policies and this is a hoodwinking activity by a few to claim this is somehow Progressive and it's not.

I've seen absolutely lies, unbelievable spin from pure debunked studies that are not based in any labor economies that are considered valid.  I see exceptional economists called racists simply because they accurate report the realities of labor markets, the laws of supply, demand and how that affects wages as well as worker protections.

I'm sorry shoving this inane open border agenda down people's throats with spin, name calling and plain outright falsehoods on the labor market realities is simply not progressive!

and I note nowhere do I see these organizations suing those employers/human traffickers/bodyshops who treat guest workers and illegals as slave labor.  You never see it.  Yet we have outrageous, well documented cases of slavery in the US right now.  Nope, not one major action item for criminal prosecution!   I would claim slavery is about as hateful as it gets...yet lordly no, these same people sure don't take on that issue and often this goes on through legal immigration, through guest worker Visas.

My favorite is trying to spin my positions and I have never once said a position on pathway to citizenship generally.

I have repeatedly said, pushing those comprehensive immigration bills which were written by the US Chamber of Commerce will decimate working America.  I have consistently said that guest workers are a vehicle to labor arbitrage Americans and I promote bills which stop that, especially on H-1B.

But your agenda, which is pure open border, you fight any enforcement of immigration law or controls, claim they should open borders before working on any reforms of the interior system will enable global labor arbitrage on steroids and is so anti-US workers, US domestic labor market stability, Americans 1st for Jobs in America, it is pure anti-US worker.

Has nothing to do with the particulars, conditions on policy for those who are already here.

 

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
I have NEVER said "deport" (0.00 / 0)
Which is another reason you people are pure propaganda and spin city.  I have never said it nor have I ever made one position statement on "pathway to citizenship".  EVER.  You divert the topic on which I am referring to, which is immigration controls, the US ability to control it's policy,enforcement, numbers as a purely domestic policy agenda and claim things I have never said

Which is another reason why I find you people so odious, you try to name call people who point out reality and claim they have positions they do not

You've even gone after many a real labor blogger, which is incredible.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
Let's try to stay on topic (0.00 / 0)
This is an important dialogue but very off topic to this blogpost. Let's try to keep comments relevant here.

[ Parent ]
DMI (0.00 / 0)
losses credibility through this topic generally.  By putting the spin machine in one policy area it detracts from any other issues unfortunately.  For example, your link at the bottom on your new election '08 policy agenda for civil litigation,  one would think would be going to the TORT reform true motivation to stop consumer rights, but it does not, the link goes into the immigration spin machine (bottom of your post).  

So, I have no idea what policy recommendations overall you are proposing.  

Civil litigation as a method to reduce the price inflation on those who are uninsured:   While I applaud these suits, in the long run and also the time window, i.e. how long was this particular suit in process? (4 years) What about appeals?  I'm not sure of the strategy to actually enact lower cost health care.  But it's certainly better than nothing.  I personally wish one could obtain change much faster than what it takes to have the harm occur, per chance put together a class action (for individual lawsuits seem to have much less chance), finally a ruling and then...
the much desired goal, change because it just hit the corporate bottom $$ line.

I know with labor law, generally the corporations play the time and money game to cause the individual to drop the complaint because they are out of money and out of time.
Also, to take any civil action against an employer, to make it equal out, so often attorneys will not take on cases of $250k or less in recoverables for it's not worth it in terms of their own hourly rates, costs.  Then, small claims courts seem to be stuck in the 1950's with the limits on what an individual can do as Pro Se, ($2k to $10k, per state) so currently there is little recourse for individuals through civil litigation on a host of issues.  Add to that the DOL/EEOC have been gutted by Bush (I'm talking general civil action)...

Anything that improves the path to citizen justice, faster I'm interested in reading about in a nutshell.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
Here's the link to the report (4.00 / 1)
Here's the link to the Election '08 Civil Justice Report. We'll fix that link at the bottom of the post soon as well.

The first page of the report gives a summary of our proposals for improving the civil justice system so that, as you say, it works more effectively for ordinary people, removes barriers to the courts, barriers to adequate compensation, and barriers to adequate representation. These are the real tort reforms that we need to be talking about.

Thanks.


[ Parent ]
Thanks (0.00 / 0)
Good agenda, I have an couple of immediate feedbacks.

The first is middle class Americans need reasonable legal representation.  I mean $300 bucks an hour is just not affordable for anybody but the super rich as an individual.
This is especially true in legal matters regarding age discrimination (very common now in the workplace, almost institutionalized in STEM career areas) and they have no legal recourse due to costs.  

Then, the other one is to allow small claims caps to be dramatically increased.  I would say $100,000 dollars would be more realistic.  This affects small business owners, sole proprietors, consultants and so on being able to recover losses without going under due to legal costs as well as cash flow.  There is also an issue with collections and filing a claim across state lines.  California for example is almost a black hole in terms of getting a foreign judgment honored, the rules are so convoluted.

It's shocking how many companies are blatantly stiffed and it's because larger companies (very common with startups actually) know there is little legal recourse in many cases.

Some comments on contracts:

There are so many employers forcing people to do "at will" employment, non-compete clauses,
one of my favorites, when the small business/sole proprietor/LLC/employee are rendering services, be personally liable for the overall product!  Let's see.
non-disclosure agreements which often accompany severance, pay, or worse, force them to train their replacement plus not talk about it...i.e you do not sign, you do not get your money....which make the individual liable for disclosure way beyond corporate trade secrets, intellectual property....including poor treatment, ethically questionable issues within the company itself.  They are doing these as employee contracts as well as traditional contracts.  They also are using 3rd party organizations as a "wedge" via contractors to subvert even more corporate responsibilities onto the 3rd party small business, contractor upon which the major corporation can claim no liability or involvement.



NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
These are great suggestions, (4.00 / 1)
Thanks.

The Civil Gideon policy gets at your first comment about access to affordable and competent representation--it would create access to a lawyer for those who cannot afford it, but right now the dialogue centers around providing this for low-income people. Middle class Americans also face similar barriers to representation, and to garner widespread support of Civil Gideon the needs of the middle class will likely have to be addressed. Plus, people seem to be more sympathetic to middle class people than to low income people, as unfair as that is.


[ Parent ]
adsf (0.00 / 0)
Yes there are numerous programs that are a catch-22 where the scale isn't graduated and thus you pretty much have to be dead in a box to qualify for the free service (or working in the underground economy, off the books).    

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
I want to differ with (0.00 / 0)
Robert. I would enjoy more posts about immigration. We have essentially had a void in the progressive movement about talking about immigration and so we are left with two solutions. Right-wing hate mongering or corporate immigration policy rather then pro-middle class humane immigration policy. And it is always good to have debate anyways.

Here is another idea. I know your TheMiddleClass.org? Well it would be great if once a bill is going to be coming to the floor you post a action alert so we can contact our reps and make sure they vote the Middle Class position. And then after the vote post the roll call so we can thank or reprimand our reps for their vote.

I'd be happy with pretty much anything though. I'm a big fan of your work and I'm glad Chris, Matt and Mike invited you!  

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power


themiddleclass.org (0.00 / 0)
thanks Populista!

The reason we don't do action alerts for the bills we post to the scorecard is that we can't do much lobbying as a 501c3. We don't tell members how to vote, we just analyze the policy.

Independently I've seen people write letters to the editor of their local papers responding to the scorecard so there is definitely grassroots action going on independent of us. But there are something that DMI is allowed to do, and some things we aren't.

The site does describe pending legislation on it so you can see what bills are coming around the pike. But we don't advocate.

Thanks though!  


[ Parent ]
Darn. (0.00 / 0)
Well it is a very interesting site so whatever you legally can do would be great!

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

[ Parent ]
that's not my post (0.00 / 0)
Their "middle class" is not middle class, it's open borders.  Any sort of enforcement or mechanism that would limit further immigration enforce the law is opposed and you have to dig deep into the details.  This is not US workers, US middle class at all and by trying to spin it as such, they discredit every other single effort.

They refuse to even acknowledge the wage impact, the underground economy and most importantly that this is a fundamental law of supply and demand in domestic labor markets.

That's just not middle class or Progressive.

It is these very groups who try to make things seem either/or
and who try to name call anyone who disagrees or points out these positions are de facto no controls or laws at all or would flood the labor market so badly as well as to implement are so costly it's not possible.

the middle class frankly are the people who are citizens of this nation, yet you will never seen their issues addressed in terms of wages, costs, erosion of labor laws, any of it by these very people.  They are at best spinning it for the illegals to the detriment of the middle class and that is not to say there are not possible solutions available that do not sacrifice the US worker, wages and they are not in some sort of "right wing hate group" from which is so often claimed.

But their solutions, demanding massive immigration, no controls or in effect no interior enforcement or somehow "after the fact" when everyone has a green card and all of it is open borders de facto and will flood the US labor market and make this situation much, much worse.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox