Legislation Quality versus corruption
Medical Malpractice Crisis was Bogus, says Florida Supreme Court
Posted on April 1, 2014 by Larry Bodine
law news now, legal news, legal news for consumers
The court said that there was no evidence of an increase in frivolous lawsuits or excessive jury verdicts in Florida. Also, the damage caps did “virtually nothing” to stabilize medical malpractice insurance rates.
State legislators created a phony medical malpractice crisis to enact laws that only served to increase insurance company profits, according to a ruling by the Florida Supreme Court.
The Court ruled that statutory caps on noneconomic damages – in cases where a person died because of medical malpractice – violate the right to equal protection under the Florida constitution. The court ruled that “the cap on noneconomic damages service no purpose other than to arbitrarily punish the most grievously injury or their surviving family members.”
The Florida article above shows how easy it is in a corrupt/capitalist country (such as NZ), for narrow interest groups to purchase legislation, that favours themselves over the interests of the public.
The following post shows how women’s groups have obtained legislation, that they think favours themselves, over men’s interests. Certainly, in many cases outcomes will be a compromise, where some degree of balancing is required. I don’t believe that the DV Act serves either women or men. However, it certainly seems to feed money from taxpayers to legal workers, against the public interests.
Protection Orders – The Quantitative Figures
Are unmanaged conflicts of interest hazardous to our children and our wealth?
A look at how Governments protect liquor sales over the public interest, is another textbook example of how corruption works in NZ Government.
Good quality legislation needs to be clear and straightforward.
Good quality legislation should be based on the latest relevant research.
Good quality legislation should be carefully debated in public and in Parliament, before being finalised and passed. Urgency is anathema to good quality legislation.
Any comments on Helen Clark’s use of urgency?
Any comments on John Key’s use of urgency?
Any comments on the Sky City gambling legislation?
Houston, we have a problem(s)
On 7# TVNZ ONE tonight reported rugby league clubs closing their bars and deciding to continue their operations as a sport, social and fitness club. Although the funding that built up these clubs 30 or 40 years ago, was the club profit on drink sales, these clubs have now decided that alcohol is draining the club, not building it up.
Doubtless it was correct, that to get people to open their wallets and put money into the club accounts, alcohol fuelled socialising was necessary.
More recently, the public’s perception of the damage done by alcohol has led to a revaluation. Club bosses now consider that enough people will support the club without needing alcohol as a lubricant. There is sufficient support for the fitness, social and sporting services, that alcohol isn’t just not necessary, it is now unwelcome.
Customers have the power to make effective decisions, if they use this power wisely.
My question is – how long will it be before the public realise how important it is to support your political party financially?
The public are competing against several well organised lobbies, alcohol, gambling, sexual services industry, legal workers. These well funded lobbies need to be balanced out by the public also buying their share of loyalty from our over-corrupted politicians.
We have belatedly seen the effects of The Right Honourable Sir Dot.Com buying influence from John Banks and John Key. Labour have also publicly admitted using sham trusts to hide the true identity of their financial supporters from public disclosure, legal but unethical!
I hope that the new found wellness / happiness values in rugby clubs, might be transmitted to the public’s willingness to financially support their political parties (if you can find one with policies that you would want to support?). Only by buying enough influence to counter the alcohol patronage and gambling patronage, can the public be protected from our politicians corruptness. Customers have the power to make effective decisions, if they use this power wisely.
An example of corruption in funding of Labour Party in Australia:
Union money was used, without being publicly disclosed or disclosed even to members of the union or even most of its management.
Kathy Jackson slush fund supported political allies
We earlier saw how Kim Dot Com secretly gave money to the late John Banks and to National Party too.
National Party uses blind trusts to channel money, without giving public disclosure about what is really going on.
By comparing public sentiment, to Government actions, it may be fairly reasonably inferred that much alcohol industry funds and gambling industry funds are influencing Government actions with respect to alcohol sales controls. Can you hear the money sloshing around and spilling into private pockets?
Truly, only the paranoids really know what is going on.
The public need to buy back their politicians, from secret, self serving industry and union influences.
New Bill Requires Background Check For Gun Lobbyists Before Purchasing Congressmen
It is a real problem. Just think of the many ways that the Sky City/National Government, has protected gambling dens and alcohol sales outlets from being managed for public safety……
Labour is “very Little” better……….