Town Square

Post a New Topic

Finally - How to vote on Proposition 46

Original post made by Rick Pshaw, Danville, on Oct 18, 2014

I couldn't make up my mind on how to vote on Proposition 46 until Babs Boxer came out in favor of it.

What she wants, I do not want. She's the windsock of how not to vote on any given issue.

Vote No on Prop 46.

Comments (11)

Posted by cardinal
a resident of Diablo
on Oct 18, 2014 at 10:14 am

Or, you could consult the Voters Guide, or ballotpedia, or various other media -- but only if you're interested in actually becoming familiar with the issues, and forming your own opinion.

Otherwise, like Rick, you can just let other people do your thinkin' for you.


Posted by DirkaDirka
a resident of San Ramon
on Oct 18, 2014 at 10:32 am

The Dirkarino is with you on this one...................

And look who loves 46, lawyer and queen weasel Boobera Boxer.

... an incredible liar and weasel...

If she comes out for it, you know it's baaaaaaaaaaad.

"Case in point: Barbara Boxer is one of the few elected officials in California actively advocating for Prop 46. Why is that? This is a state law – not a federal one.

Well, it ends up her husband is a founding partner of a medical malpractice law firm in the Bay Area. (His name is ON the firm.) It's not much of a stretch to think that a law that will encourage more lawsuits to get filed and increase payouts from those lawsuits – and therefore increase the fees paid to lawyers – will personally benefit Mr. (and therefore, Senator) Boxer."

By Tom Scott
Executive Director, California Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse
Friday, September 19th, 2014

These elitist politician weasels take advantage of the masses. False friends....

Dira Dirka Bakala

Posted by Rick Pshaw
a resident of Danville
on Oct 18, 2014 at 10:48 am

Baaaa-aa-aaah ?

No. Babs, as in Boxer, Streisand and Walters. AKA reverse windsocks.

Posted by Peter Kluget
a resident of Danville
on Oct 20, 2014 at 9:14 am

I always wondered how the right wing propagandists got people to believe that hundreds of scientists were all corrupt or incompetent (if the results of their studies might threaten certain folks' short term profits), that "trickle down" economics actually would work, why "deficits don't matter" if a Republican is president but are a catastrophe if a Democrat is, etc. Now it's clear: They just condition their acolytes to respond like Pavlov's dogs to certain stimuli: "If X is for it, I'm against it."

Sure beats thinking for yourself, eh, Rick 'n Dirka?

Posted by Shirley
a resident of San Ramon
on Oct 23, 2014 at 9:17 am

So I went to ballotpedia, clicked prop 46 and read:
"Prop 46 would drive up health care costs and taxes ...
It would also threaten the privacy of California’s personal, confidential medical records."

Posted by JT
a resident of Danville
on Oct 23, 2014 at 9:54 am

So I went to ballotpedia, clicked prop 46 and read:
"Prop 46 would"; and quickly decided that reading is for progressives and it was far more efficient to sheeply accept the party line of the enlightened mass followers of rightousness Rush, the TEA Party and the nightly Fox news... the conservatards of mass media.

Posted by voter
a resident of Danville
on Oct 23, 2014 at 12:39 pm

I am a lawyer that does not do any malpractice and I favor 46. The key fact is that the legislature artificially limited pain and suffering damage recovery for victims of medical malpractice to $250,000 something like 40 years ago. $250,000 isn't what it used to be, as we all know. So raising the limit to somewhat over $1 million is reasonable. And the other aspects of the bill----testing of doctors, etc.--- are good ideas to protect everyone.

Here's an example: If your doctor botches a surgery that forces you to have your leg amputated, wouldn't most people agree that the pain and suffering damage would be over $250,000? Yet under current law, the doctor and insurance company are not forced to bear the price of what the doctor wrongfully and negligently did to you.

I have never supported Barbara Boxer, but I will support 46.

Posted by JoePublicSafety
a resident of San Ramon
on Oct 23, 2014 at 8:12 pm

The effects of the 1975 MICRA law have now made the value of your family members with no job income(children, retirees, ect) essentially worthless as you can not obtain a lawyer in any wrongful death malpractice case.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans die yearly as the result of preventable medical negligence. Common hospital malpractice errors include: incorrect medication/dosage, surgical mistakes, preventable infections, diagnosis failures, birth delivery mistakes, anesthesia errors and under/over treatment.

All Californian families are now denied any justice and accountability when a family member with no job income dies as a result of medical errors due to the 1975 MICRA law which malpractice insurance companies backed and that capped the non-economic "pain and suffering" award to 250K with no adjustment for inflation. Except in rare punitive damage cases this is the only award available.

Malpractice lawyers will not take these wrongful death cases because the MICRA law also limits the attorney award to about 30%(BPC 6146) or about $75K of any maximum $250K award and attorney and medical expert costs in a case quickly exceeds $75K, search on "caps harm California" and "protectconsumerjustice org how micra came to be".

Governor Brown who signed MICRA into law said 17 years later that MICRA did not lower health care costs and only enriched insurers and placed negligent or incompetent physicians outside the reach of judicial accountability. Ralph Nader has reminded Governor Brown's of this earlier statement and has asked him to support Prop 46.

The MICRA cap and low non-economic damage caps in many other states have enabled malpractice insurance companies to earn billions in profits by essentially eliminating their monetary liability in these cases. It's no wonder malpractice insurance companies have spent tens of millions to defeat Prop 46 which doesn't even eliminate the cap, only adjusts it for inflation.

California malpractice insurance companies profit an incredible 70 cents for every dollar collected in malpractice premiums which leaves plenty of room for an increase in malpractice payouts without a rate increase to doctors.

22 other states do not have a non-economic damage cap and medical insurance rates are not any higher in those states nor are there shortages of physicians.

Since 1988 Prop 103 has regulated doctors malpractice insurance premiums and can not be increased unless justified with the Insurance Commissioner.

California drivers do not have a law that eliminates their liability if they kill a person in a car accident and neither should negligent medical professionals and their insurance companies. When there isn't accountability there isn't a deterrent to avoid repeating negligence.

Prop 46 also includes testing doctors for drug and alcohol which is done in other occupations such as in the transportation industry. Certainly it is in the public's interest for doctors to be thinking clearly when they have our lives in their hands.

Overprescribing of prescription narcotics is now a national epidemic. The Centers for Disease Control cited 475,000 emergency room visits and 36,000 deaths from prescription narcotic overdoses in a recent year, at a price tag of $72 billion in avoidable health care expenditures.

Prop 46 will also require physicians to check the state's existing and secure DOJ CURES prescription drug database before prescribing narcotics and other addictive drugs to curb doctor-shopping drug abusers, to prevent over-dose deaths and to reduce harmful behavior and health care costs.

PLEASE VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 46 for Public Safety and Patient Justice.

Posted by Rick Pshaw
a resident of Danville
on Oct 24, 2014 at 9:15 am

Even better than eyeballing Babs Boxer's position on any given issue, is checking out the teacher's union voter recommendations (demands). Their scorecard is a perfect list of how NOT to vote. They have never failed me.

This methodology is much more accurate than reading the propositions and it saves a great deal of time. Note that this method includes voting against ALL their recommendations (demands) for candidates for elective office.

I urge a No vote on Prop 46.

Posted by Peter Kluget
a resident of Danville
on Oct 24, 2014 at 11:22 am

Well, this thread demonstrates current America in a nutshell: Right wing puppets mindlessly repeating what they've been told by their thought masters, while the rest of us work at grappling with the facts and complexities of the real world.

Must be nice not to have to do any of that heavy lifting, eh, Rick?

Posted by Derek
a resident of Danville
on Oct 24, 2014 at 4:55 pm

How about this Rickshaw: If Kaiser is against (and God knows how many millions they have spent sponsoring ads) it, I'm for it.
I mean, if you want to be simplistic, that seems to make more sense than worrying about what some pol thinks.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Palo Alto's bold proposal to jumpstart home electrification
By Sherry Listgarten | 25 comments | 5,575 views

How Much Time do You Spend Outdoors?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 2,296 views

Collaboration center opens to foster new partnerships for lab and university
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 755 views

A picnic by Lake Chabot
By Monith Ilavarasan | 3 comments | 665 views