Comments: Final Results, Prop 12 Analysis

In my precinct I noticed a large number of voters carrying in the Link Letter voting guide for religious conservatives. It recommended a No vote. I don't remember seeing many other voting guides in peoples' hands.

Posted by Rob Booth (Slightly Rough) at September 14, 2003 03:38 PM

As I said in a previous comment, you hit the bulleye Byron about persuading South Texas to vote for Prop. 12. Also, there was no "NO on Prop 12" organzation here in El Paso at least, so it was convincing for a lot of people who don't have time to read into an issue, including my Mom (until I told her what will happen). I at least did pass some No flyers around my precinct, and it did go against prop 12 [53% to 46%] (I not going to claim the victory) but if the party here and if "No on 12" would have focused a little more here, it probably would be different.

Also, to go further on El Paso County, I am taking a glance and trying to compare this to the Mayoral Election. What it looks like is that our democratic base areas are not coming out unlike the more indepenant/GOP basis. Also, just by glancing, it seems like the Democratic base pct. did go against prop 12 but didn't have weight. Like mine (Pct 69) had 53% and my friends Pct (Pct 78) had 69%, yet we did have a low turnout similar to the mayoral election. It seems I have my work cut out for me if.

That's my report of El Paso County, where no one in Texas cares and probably no one even knows where it is.

Posted by Mike at September 15, 2003 07:23 PM

I agree with Mr. Studnicki's final comment on taking care of careless doctors. Let's get more state money so that the state medical board can investigate and punish those bad docs.

However, I want to also take care of careless lawyers. Let's see how many medical malpractice lawyers really want to pursue frivolous malpractice cases if we pass caps on retention fees and the amount a medical malpractice lawyer receives from a jury's award or settlement.

Currently, malpractice lawyers receive what?...up to 1/3 of the settlement/jury award? Let's cap it at 3% or a maximum of $50,000 per case. Removing the financial incentive in malpractice case will help reduce/remove the frivolous suits.

The GAO report also shows that states with caps on lawyer's fees inconjuction with caps on pain and suffering equals the lowest growth rate in malpractice insurance. There are bad docs, but there are many more bad lawyers. LAWYERS NEED TO BE REGULATED MORE THAN DOCTORS . . .AFTERALL, ISN'T THE RATIO OF LAWYERS TO DOCS AROUND 10 TO 1?

Kurt Reyes
Med Student

Posted by: Kurt Reyes at January 21, 2004 01:58 AM
Everyone please take a look at Mr. Studnicki's website. He and his associates are testimony of how financial drives lawyers to seek and pursue frivlous lawsuits. They claim they have recovered "millions". These millions result in higher malpractice premiums and also result in some specialties not providing services. For example, if you receive a brain bleed south of San Antonio, TX, the neurosurgeon here will not do any intracranial surgery because of malpracice.

We can let lawyers decide healthcare or we can let doctors decide healthcare. Prop 12 was the first step. We need to cap lawyers' fees.

Kurt Reyes
Med Student
San Antonio

....All that said and done, let's do something about careless doctors. Maybe that will solve the problem of innocent victimes being injured and killed.

Adam Studnicki

Medical Malpractice Lawyer

Studnicki, Jaffe & Woods, PLLC

Posted by Kurt Reyes at January 21, 2004 02:16 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?