pisses me off. Note Justice Scalia's flippant remark near the article's bottom. What he's saying is essentially ," if you weren't so poor, you'd have had better care" and using that as a way of protecting those poor little HMO'S from the sick and dying patients they make sicker or dead.
In 2002 my arm got really sick-my regular doc tried everything from Vioxx to steroids, but nothing worked. My fingers were like little purple link sausages and every movement was accompanied with near-blinding pain when my insurance finally gave the OK to see a neuropathologist of their choice. He stuck some wires in my arm and ran some current through, took some X-rays and decided that I had a rare form of neural disease and the arm was gonna have to come off. I was not very happy about that, so I went to see an Orthopedic surgeon that my doc recommended. He checked me out and said he didn't find anything to support this-instead a few benign tumors had pushed the Ulnar nerve out of the channel it normal occupies and the pressure was slowly killing the nerve. He pushed through surgery instead of amputation and I'm whole today because of him.
But what if I wasn't so lucky? What if my second opinion was another quack?
I'd be in court, explaining why these mother-fuckers cut off my arm, and the judge tells me "it's your fault for having a shitty doctor?"
If capping lawsuits meant lowering premiums to a level I where I could afford coverage, I'd be more enthusiastic. But that's not gonna happen. It's just more profit into the pockets of the HMO's .
De-regulation ,legal protections and huge tax subsidies all help the big corporations increase profits, which causes their stock prices to rise, which let's the talking heads crow about how well the economy is doing.
If you're one of the millions working a shit job for low pay and no benefits it's hard to give a shit about Wall Street. Rest assured they don't care about you.