bmagnus

Don’t Let The Moment Pass

But day after day
The show must go on,
And time slipped away
Before you could build any castles in Spain…
The chance had gone by.

With nothing to say
And no one to say it to,
Nothing has changed.
You still got it all to do,
Surely you know.
The chance has gone by…

Don’t let this happen to you. It’s one thing to wake up one morning and say “Well, I guess I will never be Queen of England and I will never be an Astronaut.” It’s another thing to wake up one morning and realize that all the things you wanted to do with your life just haven’t happened, and that you have nobody to blame but yourself.

Do yourself a favor. Take 5 minutes out of your busy day to write down some things you would like to do with your life. Don’t think too hard about it, don’t rationalize any of it, and don’t spend too much time on it. We both know you have other stuff you have to do today. Fold up the piece of paper and don’t think about it again until tomorrow.

Tomorrow, take another 5 minutes with that bit of paper. Sort the items into Short Term Goals (“Christmas in Florida” or “Give money to [name of charity]”), Medium Term Goals (“Earn Black Belt”), Long Term Goals (“Own chain of Pizza Parlors”), and Impossible Dreams (“Win Lottery”). Remember that one person’s perfectly reasonable Long Term Goal might be another person’s Impossible Dream. Just because I will never win an Oscar doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try to do so yourself. In an ideal world, there should be some goals for each of the areas of your life: professional goals, relationship goals, personal growth and spirituality goals, you get the picture.

Now, I will be honest. I had such a bit of paper. It sat in a side compartment in my purse for some years, forgotten. When I opened it and read it again, I realized I had accomplished much of what I had written down. By that time, most of the things I hadn’t accomplished didn’t matter to me anymore. Maybe the magic of writing such things down is that it forces you to admit what you really want in clear, concise words. Maybe it’s that writing it down is an automatic reminder.

If you really want to achieve, you will look at that list and figure out how to make those things happen. Break it down into manageable steps. Be realistic about what you can do, what you need help doing, and what you need to learn to do. Do you want to see the cherry blossoms in Japan? You’d better start by getting a passport, finding out when cherry blossom season is, and maybe learning a bit of Japanese. After that, all you need is time and money.

Don’t make excuses. This is what you want. You wrote it down. If there is something standing between you and your goal, find a way around it. Some obstacles will be insurmountable, most will not. Please, don’t let your life pass you by, one dreary routine laden day after another.

HIPAA Compliance

HIPAA, or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, is a law that among other things codifies patient privacy rules. It says when a doctor or hospital can release data, when they must release data, when they must not release data, what data they can give to whom, and under what circumstances. Compliance is a highly necessary very expensive legal nightmare — and your doctor probably did not attend law school. The 5 year cost of implementing it is estimated at $22.5 Billion. If you really want to know about HIPAA you might try looking here or here, but the short version is this: healthcare providers must try to keep your private data private; they can send information to your insurance company because you sign a form that says they can; they can send your information to an insurance claims clearinghouse for processing — and they have to keep your data private too — because they are a middleman between your doctor and the insurance company; some data must be reported to a state or local health department under state or local law (e.g., sexually transmitted diseases, signs of abuse); data which does not personally identify you can be used in academic medical studies (“total cases of flu reported” or “male patient presented with unusual symptoms”). There are even limits on what they can tell your immediate family without your direct permission.

Figuring out the rules and helping healthcare institutions follow them is big big business. There is physical security of keeping people who don’t belong out of the files. There is educating the staff so they don’t say things they shouldn’t in front of people who do not have a right to know. There is computer security, since most medical offices use electronic billing and some use electronic medical records. Double this concern if anyone uses the internet to obtain the most up-to-date medical data; triple it if anyone uses email to communicate with patients or other healthcare professionals. Beyond all this, theoretically medical offices must insure that other businesses they deal with are also compliant, from the insurance companies and clearing houses, to any outsourced billing, right down to the cleaning service that sweeps the file room.

These things being said, I offer three current news items with HIPAA concerns. The first happened in Denton, TX. Denton, less than an hour north of Dallas-Fort Worth is home to the University of North Texas. It is also home to a pharmacist who refused to fill a prescription for a “morning-after pill” presented by a rape victim. You may recall having seen this story last week. Today’s news is that the pharmacist in question and 2 coworkers have been fired. Yes, one of the issues was that he violated company policy: “Eckerd’s employment manual says pharmacists are not allowed to opt out of filling a prescription for religious, moral or ethical reasons.” Frankly problems could have been avoided with a proper new employee orientation meeting. The other reason he was fired is that he violated HIPAA, and admitted it on CNN: “I actually called my pastor … and asked him what he thought about it.”

Violating company policy is one thing. Violating Federal law is another.

Another news item with HIPAA compliance concerns is being whipped up by none other than Attorney General John Ashcroft. The Government wants 6 hospitals to hand over sensitive medical records for hundreds of women — to determine whether a medical procedure they may have had was medically necessary. Yes, the procedure is a type of abortion, this time. Maybe next time it will be Botox injections; after all, botulism is a dangerous germ that could be used by terrorists you know. The hospitals in question have correctly maintained that turning over the records would violate patient privacy. Legal wrangling before a series of Federal judges has ensued. From the article: “Citing federal case law, the department said in a brief that “there is no federal common law” protecting physician-patient privilege. In light of “modern medical practice” and the growth of third-party insurers, it said, “individuals no longer possess a reasonable expectation that their histories will remain completely confidential.”” Perhaps the Department of Justice should read the HIPAA rules.

Finally, I present what must at first seem tangential. This week Microsoft admitted there is a security flaw in Windows that “could allow hackers to break into personal computers and snoop on sensitive data.” Or three, including one that could “offer up complete control of the computer. From there, the sky’s the limit: a hacker could install new software (including, for instance, Trojan horses), wipe hard drives, hijack files, or any of a thousand other things.” One computer security firm claims there are 7 more to be reported. TechWeb’s Security Pipeline, in an article about the still circulating “MyDoom” virus, says “In other words, there will be vulnerable machines and those machines will become infected, no matter how heroic your efforts. It’s a reminder that even the leanest of enterprises faces security challenges of daunting complexity. Even the most rapidly responsive IT security team must deal with attacks that spread in minutes.”

Yes, they just said that no matter what you do, your Windows network will be attacked by viruses. And personal data on such a computer or network is not secure. Yes, including personal data on, say, the computers your doctor’s office uses for billing your insurance company. It is therefore my contention that Windows is inherently not HIPAA compliant.

Maybe Ashcroft would have better luck sending crackers after those medical files.

The Magic Job Machine

Wand? Check. Fairy dust? Check. Smoke and mirrors? Check.

Today, the White House predicted the creation of 2.6 million jobs in 2004. It is worth noting that last year’s White House prediction of creating 1.7 million jobs was not reached; job creation in 2003 fell short by almost 1.8 million.

It sounds like a lot of jobs: 2,600,000 jobs created in one year. Now, divide that by 12 months in a year. Feel free to use a calculator, but my figure is 216,666.67 jobs per month. In the interest of simplification, lets say between 216,000 and 217,000. This number is already optimistic. Remember when we found out there were only 1000 jobs created in December of 2003? That number was revised upwards to 16,000 (320 jobs per state). Just Friday we learned that although the economists figured there were 160,000 jobs created in January (still far short of 216,000), in reality only 112,000 jobs had been created (51% of 216,000). Oh, and please note that this ambitious level of projected job creation in 2004 still falls short of what was achieved in the Clinton Administration. People are starting to wonder how this jobless recovery thing works.

But wait, it gets worse. Remember, economists pretty much agree that just to keep the unemployment rate from rising, the economy must add something like 150,000 jobs each month. This is a consensus number, an average; some economists think the number is closer to 100,000, others believe it’s more like 200,000. So not only does the January number fall short of helping the unemployment rate, the unmet projection would barely have helped. Indeed, the whole 2.6 million jobs this year might be needed just for new additions to the workforce. And that’s before we go giving work permits to non-citizens.

But remember that 1.7 million jobs that was supposed to have been created last year? That would have only worked out to 141,666.67 jobs per month. Even if that modest goal had been achieved, we would still be looking at rising unemployment.

Oh wait, you say. I have forgotten that the job creation numbers are skewed by the self-employed and independent contractors, that legion of people who have created jobs for themselves. Tell it to this guy:

Even those who still count themselves among the employed in America are struggling to make ends meet. Self-employed computer programmer Thomas Mooney — who bills himself as the “president/janitor” of his Minneapolis company, TeleProc — said he cannot last much longer with so little work in an industry that was once booming. “I’m barely employed — no income yet this year,” Mooney said. “I have $7,000 in future prospect business and that is all I know about for the rest of the year.”

Yeah, being your own boss is great. It’s even better when you have an income.

Astute Commentary Day

If I had time to write a half dozen commentaries today, I might, because there are a lot of important things going on. Luckily, there are a number of very excellent things to read by other people. Allow me to point out a few particularly good must-read items.

The New York Times offers this particularly good commentary on why the exchange rate — the price of dollars — is important to you. The important bits begin in the third paragraph. Need a little perspective on this? Try these items.

Didn’t catch the President on “Meet the Press” this morning? Here’s the transcript. Here’s somebody ripping it apart point by point. It’s worth reading the whole thing. If you haven’t had enough, this one is by former Speaker of the House Jim Wright.

From the “But that isn’t the important thing” important, we have this brilliant skewering of Federal investigatory priorities. In short, “Investigate Janet Jackson’s nipple? Do we have our priorities straight?” Maybe you’ll like this commentary better.

From Iraq, there is this item: the Japanese have arrived.

And finally, perhaps these two items are related. Now don’t get me wrong, there is a time and place to discuss religion. Thirty-thousand feet straight up somewhere between LA and NYC trapped in a thin metal tube going 500 miles per hour is not the right place. Unless maybe it’s crashing.

Happy Birthday, Hello Kitty!

Or, Hello ShortWoman!

Today is the 30th Anniversary of the introduction of Hello Kitty, not to be confused with her actual birthday, which Sanrio insists is November 1. To commemorate the occasion, 30 lucky collectors will have the opportunity to purchase a 3 centimeter high platinum figure of the birthday kitty, adorned with 131 diamonds. The price is a mere 3 Million Yen.

Perhaps this sum is out of your budget. You can still purchase Hello Kitty trinkets ranging from $2 pens to toilet paper to sake sets to televisions. Or maybe you need a USB hub. Perhaps a $1000 Hello Kitty dress for the fashionable Hello Kitty fan in your life.

It is clear that Hello Kitty and Generation X have grown up together. What, you didn’t think this stuff was for little girls, did you? Indeed, you either love her or hate her but nobody can be ambivalent to that much cuteness.

This has helped Sanrio earn revenues of between a Half Billion and a Billion dollars annually, depending whose figures you like (and truth be told, exchange rates). She is a popular icon both in the United States and Japan, where there is even a theme park in her honor. Her rise is documented in the book, “Hello Kitty : The Remarkable Story of Sanrio and the Billion Dollar Feline Phenomenon.”

If you are looking for a more subdued way to honor Hello Kitty, preferably one that does not involve your purchase of something pink, you might check out the “Jump to Japan” exhibit at The Childrens Museum of Seattle. Press coverage here and here.

Two Rants

Rant One, wherein the ShortWoman lambasts Stupid Airliner Tricks

Today we are told that, once again, certain British Airways and Air France flights have been canceled due to security concerns. As you may recall — the CNN article points this out if you do not — similar flights have been canceled in the last five weeks. Indeed, one of the flights in question is the exact same flight number as one of the previously scrutinized flights.

Now then, imagine you have tickets on one of these flights. What do you do? You find another way to get where you need to go. This is true whether you are a businessman, a tourist, or a terrorist. If there is, as U.S. Intelligence claims, a valid threat to these flights, then the answer is improved screening of passengers and cargo on those flights. This appears to have been the case with some other flights. Canceling the flights moves the terrorists to an undisclosed location. Insert Dick Cheney joke here. Indeed, since it would appear that the forces of good are wise to the alleged plot against British Airways Flight #223, a terrorist with any functional brain cells whatsoever would have decided another — almost any other — flight would make an easier target.

According to the Washington Post, the decision to cancel these flights was made by the British and French respectively. United States officials had told them these flights would only be allowed in American airspace if armed marshals were aboard. Europeans have different ideas than Americans about security and firearms in general. Clearly they did not take well to the idea of being told how to run things, told to put men with guns on airplanes. Perhaps they determined that the supposed terrorist threat was less credible than the threat of putting a known gunman aboard, even one with a security clearance.

Speaking of targets, does anyone find it the least bit suspicious that of all the airlines that have Heathrow/Dulles flights, only Air France and British Airways are publicly known to be the subject of such concerns?

If you are planning international travel, you might want to have a couple of alternate arrangements in the back of your mind.

Rant Two, in which Employment Data is once more manipulated

Yesterday, I heard the audio clip of President Bush saying “People are finding work.” Today, Reuters is following up on that claim, and Treasury Secretary John Snow’s assertion that the job creation numbers must simply be wrong.

Today’s theory is that both job creation and employment numbers are undercounted because of the self-employed. In short, the employment numbers look worse than they really are because of all the Amway distributors, people selling furniture they make in the garage, people who “make up to $1000 per week in your spare time on your computer,” and one-person businesses doing everything from home repair to tax preparation. Oh yeah, the numbers are also skewed by all those people who are contractors, a subset of the self-employed whose clients — or all too often, singular client — may be flouting IRS rules in an attempt to avoid paying benefits and to sidestep certain other liabilities. Make no mistake, this is a group of people who may or may not be making a living wage, are unlikely to have health insurance, are unlikely to have anything in the way of retirement savings, are unlikely to ever create jobs and hire employees. A substantial number of self-employed people are a lingering cold away from economic ruin.

This excellent Slate article is perhaps the most comprehensive and best written item I have read recently on employment/unemployment statistics and reality. Here’s a little bit from the middle:

The payroll survey is less likely to capture the self-employed, newly formed businesses, or domestic employees. So it could be that the millions of Americans who have been laid off are busy starting companies, or working full-time as self-employed consultants. All of this entrepreneurial energy would show up in the Household Survey and be good news for the economy.

Alternatively, the millions of Americans who are self-employed could simply be frustrated in their efforts to find full-time, salary-and-benefits-paying work at established companies. In other words… they’re self-employed because they’re unemployed. That would be bad news for the economy, and it probably wouldn’t show up in the Household Survey.

I count myself in the camp that thinks a substantial number of the “self-employed” are that way because it’s better than nothing.

“I’ll gladly pay you in 2007 for a Hamburger Today”

The Congressional Budget Office now predicts record budget deficits. In fact, they are predicting that budget deficits will double the National Debt within 10 years… and they are using very modest assumptions to predict it. This story is big enough to be international news. Not everyone understands why this is a big deal (or even what this is) so let me explain.

Who is this Congressional Budget Office anyway? The CBO is a non-partisan office that provides Congress with financial and economic information they need to put together the Federal Budget each year. For what it’s worth, they are currently hiring for several positions.

How is the National Debt different from the National Budget Deficit? They both mean the Federal Government owes money, right? The budget deficit is just the money the Government will spend that it doesn’t have in one year. The National Debt is the cumulative money owed by the Government for all the years it has spent more than it has taken in, minus what it has paid off, but plus interest. All told, it’s a lot of money.

Alright, who do we owe this money to? The National Debt is owed to the people who hold United States Savings Bonds and Treasury Bills. These instruments are considered very safe because, after all, they are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States of America. Impugn the safety of these investments at risk of being labeled some kind of communist. Even if you don’t have any of these bonds yourself, some of the interest you earn from your bank or brokerage account is probably derived from such bonds.

Let me rephrase that, who owns the bonds? A large hunk of the debt is actually owned by none other than the Federal Government. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, and it doesn’t mean you could slash the debt by invalidating bonds held by the Government. Agencies such as the Social Security Trust buy bonds because they know the day is coming when expenses will outstrip revenues. The next biggest holders are, in order, Japan, China, and the United Kingdom. In 1999, it was estimated that 55% of bonds were held by “private investors” including individuals, fund managers, and corporations.

Why is this such a big deal? I hear the political candidates talk about it, but how does the National Debt affect me? There are lots of ways the National Debt might affect you. Money the Government pays on the National Debt is money that can’t be used to pay for highways, schools, law enforcement, courts, and other important things in your community. Money that banks use to buy United States bonds is money they can’t lend you to buy cars and houses, and that means you will have a harder time getting a loan and you will have to pay more in interest. Money that banks use to buy bonds is also money they can’t lend companies to build new factories and create new jobs for you and your community. This is part of how the economy was able to create so many jobs during the Clinton Administration when there was a budget surplus and the National Debt was going down. Money the Government uses to pay the debt and the interest on the debt must ultimately be paid with taxes you pay. So far, your personal share is over $23,000. It’s a lot of money.

Who says we have to pay it off? Can’t we just keep making bonds? Heck, why not print money to pay off the debt? There is a ceiling on the amount of debt the nation is allowed to have, although Congress can vote to raise it. Besides which, just like your own credit rating, the national credit rating will suffer if we owe “too much.” And when a person or nation has a lousy credit rating, they have to pay higher interest rates (meaning it will cost even more to pay off the debt). Printing money is not a solution because it causes inflation (meaning it will cost even more for you to make ends meet). If that wasn’t reason enough, the standard prescription for inflation is for Agent Greenspan at the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates.

What can we do about this? Start by doing the normal democracy things, like voting and writing your elected officials. This thing is destined to become a political minefield. There’s nothing stopping you from campaigning for a candidate you feel will encourage more fiscal responsibility. In fact, if you meet the requirements, you can run for office yourself. Even if you lose, you will get your opinions out there in a big way.

One last thing. You said this CBO report used “very modest assumptions.” What do you mean? Could this be worse? Yes, there are several key assumptions that even the authors of this report know are unrealistic: that the tax cuts will be allowed to expire under current law with no new tax cuts; that there will not be another recession; and that there will be no large spending initiatives. Oh yeah, and the report does not forecast far enough out to reflect what happens when the Baby Boomers start to retire and collect Social Security.

And there you have the critical things you need to know about the budget deficit and the National Debt. Finally, as primary season is now in full swing, you might want to take a look at this little comparison of the Democratic candidates ideas on health insurance. It’s an interesting read.

Shakeup in Ed’s Department

It seems like school and the children who attend them have gotten a lot of attention lately. Everybody agrees that schools are not as good as they could be. Nobody agrees what to do about it.

Schools in this nation took a long time to get where they are now. They will take some years of diligent retooling to become world class. The educational fad of the month club will not suffice, nor will feel-good strategies with no supporting research. This does not mean we should give up on today’s high school students, but rather recognize that today’s incremental improvements will be most visible when today’s kindergarteners are in high school. We will not know for several years whether current reforms work. Some evidence already suggests that Leave No Child Behind is not as effective as it should be.

Schools will improve, and improve dramatically, but not until we as a nation declare that the number one priority of our schools from grade school to grad school is to educate children. That sounds stupidly simple until you understand that if education is the first priority, then athletics and other extracurriculars and even University level research can at best be second.

Some will argue correctly that it is difficult if not impossible to educate children who are worried about where thier next meal is coming from, or whether one parent is getting drunk/high today yet, or getting home without encountering bullies/gangs/drug dealers. As one young woman interviewed on a Detroit news program said, “It’s hard to concentrate on your papers when part of the ceiling is falling on them.” So of course there must be adequate investment in such areas as facilities, referrals to social services, nutritious school lunches, and age appropriate discipline. However, this does not mean turning schools into million dollar nannyvilles.

Studies have shown that although throwing money at schools improves them, beyond a certain point costs outstrip benefits. Some people have suggested that money mismanagement is rampant in some school districts, and thus more money is very likely to mean more waste if not more outright fraud. Waste and fraud do not educate children.

If we have high school students who cannot read a newspaper or an instruction manual, who cannot do enough math to balance a checkbook or figure out how much X they will need for project Y, who do not understand the Bill of Rights or how we elect Presidents and pass laws, then we cannot give that student a diploma. If they have been getting good grades and still do not know basic stuff every high school graduate should be expected to know, that is the fault of the teacher who gave good grades rather than face reality (and possibly angry parents). Students, Parents, Communities, and Employers all have a vested interest in the High School Diploma representing a basic proficiency in these and several other areas.

All this being said, allow me to offer a few ideas on real Educational Reform. First, recognize that testing is an important way to find out where kids are and what if anything they have learned. However, tests do not teach kids anything. All standardized student testing — state, federal, and everything else throughout the year — should take up no more than one school week. Such tests should keep in mind age/grade appropriate standards and skills. Thus, teaching to the test should be replaced with teaching to and exceeding the standards. “Improvement” is not a sufficient goal: this goal assumes that there are no good schools, that every school is by nature deficient. There needs to be a clear, attainable minimum standard, and the understanding that some schools will exceed them. That’s okay. Excellence is good.

Second, all teachers and school administrators should be encouraged to look at each activity and expense and ask “How does this educate children?” Everything, from the morning announcements on the loudspeaker on up to the last extracurricular at the end of the day should be open to scrutiny. Be honest about actual costs in time and money. Entire programs might be labeled “non-educational” and cut, leaving more money for things that do work. In a related vein, consider whether the costs are worth the benefits. Such analysis may well lead some schools to eschew “free” government money because it simply costs too much. Yeah, that may mean that such schools don’t get “their fair share” of tax dollars, paid from within their district. Encourage parents to vote.

Finally, what if I told you there was one simple thing we could do, particularly in our high schools, that would raise comprehension and achievement levels within a year? There would furthermore probably be incremental improvements for about 5 years before leveling off. Test scores would improve not because of coaching or teaching to the test, but rather because the kids would know and understand more. And what if I were to tell you that this same change would have other beneficial effects? This same change has the potential to reduce crime both by and against teenagers, reduce gang activity and drug/alcohol use, reduce truancy rates, and reduce teen pregnancy.

What is this educational miracle, and why aren’t we doing it already? It is the idea of starting High School no earlier than 8:30 or 9:00 AM, and letting classes run until at least 3:00 PM. Researchers agree that teenager’s brains just flatly aren’t fully awake before then. It should be obvious that kids who are not awake cannot perform as well academically. And you have falsely been told that classes must start by 7:30 and be out by 1:30 because of money. The official reason teenagers are let out of school so early is so they can take care of younger siblings they don’t have, and take part time jobs which are increasingly being taken by grown-ups trying to make ends meet, and to facilitate the school bus schedule which can be changed. The real reason is so student athletes have more time on the playing field before dark. That’s right, the performance of every student has been compromised so the jocks don’t have to use light bulbs.

Honestly, I would have thought academics for everyone were more important than sports practice for a chosen elite.

Raspberry Tort

Last night, the President made his State of the Union speech before both houses of Congress. Among the ideas he put forth were increased money for school drug testing (a pricey logistical nightmare even before considering civil liberties issues), greater Federal student aid for those who take tougher courses (great idea, except for that exacerbating the gap between suburban and inner-city schools which have no advanced programs), and a Federal ban on the use of performance enhancing drugs by professional athletes (never mind that as a part-owner of a baseball team, Mr. Bush knows full well all the leagues have rules which do not require Federal intervention). I will leave it to others to point out the logical and practical issues of these and other issues mentioned by the esteemed Mr. Bush.

I would like to focus your attention on these passages if I may:

Our agenda for jobs and growth must help small business owners and employees with relief from needless federal regulation, and protect them from junk and frivolous lawsuits….

To protect the doctor-patient relationship, and keep good doctors doing good work, we must eliminate wasteful and frivolous medical lawsuits…. By keeping costs under control, expanding access, and helping more Americans afford coverage, we will preserve the system of private medicine that makes America’s health care the best in the world.

It must seem odd that out of all the things said last night, I am focusing on 3 sentences. To be sure, there were intervening paragraphs, but make no mistake: these ideas are one and the same. Do you remember back in the early 90s, when “Health Care Reform” was discussed? Before the conversation went on too long, it was clear that the participants meant “health care insurance reform.” By the mid-90s, they meant little more than “HMO reform.” Another discussion is being fatally limited, as illustrated by the above 3 sentences.

Somehow, politicians and doctors both have gotten it into their heads that “tort reform” and “caps on non-economic damages” are the same thing. They are not. Tort reform is more than damage caps. It is both cynical and disingenuous to propose that a limit on the amount of money a doctor or business can lose in a court case will improve anything for the typical American. How can this be so? Let me count the ways.

1. Such a cap will not, contrary to AMA opinion, bring down liability insurance rates. When the AMA says that caps are “proven” tort reform, they are referring to California’s MICRA statute, which was enacted as part of a more comprehensive plan than a mere cap. Other states where they have enacted liability caps are still facing premium increases of 8-45%. Now, you don’t really think your doctor can afford to not raise prices when one of his largest non-employee expenses is out of control?

Insurance rates are more dependent on the investments of insurance companies than the claims they must pay. With interest rates this low, insurance companies have to raise rates. This is doubly true for publicly held insurance companies who must continually impress Wall Street. If you want lower insurance rates — not just liability, but home, life, health, and even auto insurance — re-mutualize insurance companies and hope Mr. Greenspan has to raise rates sooner rather than later.

2. Damage caps severely limit the rights of average Americans. Anybody can file a lawsuit, and that is truly a double edged sword. As one person put it, “Lawsuits by small people who’ve been injured by big companies is the one thing out there still protecting the little guy.”

Not only will damage caps harm the very people who have been most egregiously hurt through the negligence of others, they limit the ability of such people to obtain legal counsel. As long as lawyers can look forward to a percentage of the final take, there will of course be abuses. That problem is solved by looking at the way lawyers are paid, which is unlikely to happen inasmuch as most legislators are lawyers. Want to cut down truly frivolous lawsuits? Give every judge the authority to declare lawsuits frivolous and compel the plaintiff (or his attorney) to pick up everybody’s legal bill.

3. The much lambasted “mega-verdict” that damage caps seek to eliminate is a tool that juries need, and a tool that businesses need to fear. You don’t honestly think juries return such opinions because they just believe the victim deserves to be a millionaire, do you? They return such verdicts as a punishment to the defendant and a message to the defendant’s competitors: treat people this way and you will be crushed.

Fear of a large verdict actually helps the court system by encouraging out-of-court settlements. Interestingly enough, the poster child for tort reform is asbestos liability. Now, there is no debate that asbestiosis is really bad, but the business world feels that the lawsuits — now against the deepest available pockets — are out of hand. It is of course pure coincidence that Halliburton stands to gain from any tort reform that addresses asbestos.

4. Damage caps would be a boon for large corporations, but would still allow small businesses to be put out of business by lawsuits. Take, for example, the famous McDonalds Coffee Case. A $250,000 million damage cap is little more than a rounding error to a company the size of McDonalds, but it would put almost any corner diner you have ever eaten in out of business. Do you really want to send the message to America’s largest corporations, our largest polluters, our most abusive employers that they can do whatever they want, as long as they pay the $250,000 fine at the end of the trial?

I agree that we must take the Lotto mentality out of our civil courts, but damage caps are not the answer. Instead, make a large percentage of the non-economic damages payable directly to the jurisdiction of the court. The offender gets punished; the windfall is less motivating; and the city or state gets money they badly need. I can’t think of anything not to like about this plan.

Mr. Bush presents you, the voter and taxpayer, with a false “either-or”: either we enact damage caps or costs of everything will spiral out of control. Tort reform isn’t about keeping your family doctor delivering babies. It is about big business covering their assets.

The Right to Remain Silent: It’s a Good Thing

Today, jury selection begins for the trial of domestic deity Martha Stewart. If you haven’t followed the case at all, this timeline provides a minimally adequate summary. If you have been living in Amish country or the Unabomber’s shack, and don’t know who Ms. Stewart is, this short biography says that she is a retired model, retired stockbroker, former caterer, newspaper columnist, author, and all-around expert on all things domestic. As many people love her as love to hate her in this role.

The short version of the saga is this: about 2 years ago, Ms. Stewart was very fortunate to sell almost a quarter million dollars of stock in a biotech company the day before the FDA announced their drug would not be approved. The stock of this company needless to say was down sharply on the news. The immediate question was lucky, or had “insider information.” Being a former stockbroker, she very well knew that insider trading is something that could get you in big trouble. Indeed, the former CEO of that biotech company is in jail for trading on insider information about his company. But Ms. Stewart is not being charged with insider trading; she is charged with “lying to investigators, obstructing justice and securities fraud.”

The real issue is what she said to investigators and to the public. Specifically, she told shareholders in her own company that she had done nothing wrong. Loud statements about how she did nothing wrong are now the ammunition against her in court. In the expert words of Eric Dezenhall, “The way to keep out of jail is to shut your mouth; the way to rescue your brand is to talk. She’s trying to do two things at the same time, and there’s no way you can do both brilliantly.”

You would think some lawyer would have recommended she say nothing more than how she was looking forward to defending herself against “such ludicrous charges.” But the moral of the story — regardless of this media circus at taxpayer expense — is that the Fifth Amendment is good for you, and there is a reason the Miranda warning begins with “You have the right to remain silent.”

Don’t forget, tonight President Bush makes the State of the Union address. Before then, you might want to do some light reading. Try some of these interesting items.