<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on:</title> <atom:link href="http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2004/12/are-caps-answer-to-malpractice-crisis.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2004/12/are-caps-answer-to-malpractice-crisis.html</link> <description></description> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:56:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" /> <item><title>By: Saint Nate</title><link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2004/12/are-caps-answer-to-malpractice-crisis.html#comment-51821</link> <dc:creator>Saint Nate</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:37:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2004/12/17517.html#comment-51821</guid> <description>From Ms. Doroshow&#039;s side:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;i&gt;The way to reduce rates is through insurance reform. This is working in California, where residents passed Proposition 103, which lets consumers ask for a hearing for any rate increase above 15%&lt;/i&gt;Objection! Counsel is misrepresenting facts.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, Prop 103 only applies  applies to regulated medical malpractice insurance companies, which is only about half of the insureres for medical providers in California. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Second, no malpractice insurer has ever been denied a premium increase under Prop. 103. There&#039;s not a lot of point in requesting a hearing if it&#039;s not going to get heard. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For more info, check out what &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://www.blogger.com/r?http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calphys.org%2Fhtml%2Fbb220.asp&quot;&gt;Califronia Physician&lt;/a&gt; has to say. about the myths of Prop 103. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I could go on pointing out flaws in the ambulance chaser&#039;s arguments, but ultimately I&#039;d rest my case the same point as Dr. Anderson: Caps aren&#039;t the perfect solution to the crisis, but they still work.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From Ms. Doroshow&#8217;s side:</p><p><i>The way to reduce rates is through insurance reform. This is working in California, where residents passed Proposition 103, which lets consumers ask for a hearing for any rate increase above 15%</i>Objection! Counsel is misrepresenting facts.</p><p>First, Prop 103 only applies  applies to regulated medical malpractice insurance companies, which is only about half of the insureres for medical providers in California.</p><p>Second, no malpractice insurer has ever been denied a premium increase under Prop. 103. There&#8217;s not a lot of point in requesting a hearing if it&#8217;s not going to get heard.</p><p>For more info, check out what <a HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calphys.org%2Fhtml%2Fbb220.asp">Califronia Physician</a> has to say. about the myths of Prop 103.</p><p>I could go on pointing out flaws in the ambulance chaser&#8217;s arguments, but ultimately I&#8217;d rest my case the same point as Dr. Anderson: Caps aren&#8217;t the perfect solution to the crisis, but they still work.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using apc
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 2/5 queries in 0.003 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 343/343 objects using apc
Content Delivery Network via cdn.kevinmd.com

Served from: www.kevinmd.com @ 2012-02-14 15:41:26 -->
