What are some arguments for tort reform in the United States? Against it? Your personal take on it?

Answer 1

Against.

Damage caps would make the occasional tort suit "part of the cost of doing business" and not dissuade the perpetually negligent (or willfully tortious) from their acts.

Tort law is pretty morbid. Take it from someone who's used the Personal Injury Valuation Handbook. You can look up various injuries and figure out what the "going rate" is.

What, your convenience store sold you a counterfeit pair of sunglasses (advertising them as real) and when you went to put them on, they broke and a shard blinded your right eye? Just flip to the appropriate page and find out how much it's worth to be permanently blind in one eye.

Suppose the victim was a police officer or active-duty serviceman? Poof, he's out of a job.

Suppose the victim was an Olympic class marksman and the glasses took out his shooting eye? Poof, no Games for him.

Tort actions are about making a person whole for the damage they've caused. We can't give back an eye, or bring someone's dead baby back to life...all we can do is give them money. And the more egregious the act, the higher the punitive damage award should be.

Answer 2

Well who's fault is it that insurance costs are rising out of control?

The doctors? Does the medical industry do enough to police iteslf?

The lawyers? Do lawyers fight for too much compensation for clients? Do they bring too many frivolous lawsuits?

My person take - its the insurance industry. When the stock market is high, doctors premiums drop (insurance company wants to bring in as much money as possible to invest). When the stock market drops, insurance companies stop investing and raise the price of premiums. It really has nothing to do with the size of injury verdicts.

Answer 3

For one thing, medical care is very expensive to cover all the excessive jury verdicts and malpractice insurance.

We need tort reform!