The 2 or 3 people who actually visit this site might have noticed I have been playing musical templates the last day or so. I like this one all right; the last one didn't show the hyperlinks well, so I changed it.

It's no great news that I went to the Tennessee-Ole Miss game last weekend. What was cool about this game was that I got to sit in the East Skyboxes. Here's an exterior view of the structure. For the well-heeled (and lucky hangers-on like me), they set out a heckuva spread here both before and during the game. We're talking lamb and beef tenderloin, lobster ravioli, shrimp etouffee, and a delightful white chocolate mousse for dessert that cleaned the pallette jusy right.

My assessment: it was OK, and quite plush, but considering the thick glass separating you from the game itself, there still is a disconnect feeling about sitting there. Don't get me wrong, though: if asked, I would attend there in the future!

Interesting coincidence: the last [and only other] time I was in a skybox was in 1984, when my friend Glenn had an invite from UT Chancellor Jack Reese to come up to the Chancellor's box. Who were we playing that day? Ole Miss! Oh, and we won that day, too.

UPDATE: The Skybox links above don't work right. However, just click on the links in the page you are directed to, and you will see some interior photos.

Not only is Ann Coulter crazy and dangerous, she's a snob, too.

Don't get me wrong. I honestly don't know whether this Harriet Miers would be a good Supreme Court Justice or not. I do know that there is nothing in the Supreme Court Justice job description that says, "Must have attended elite university, such as Harvard, Yale, et al." Coulter's reasoning is insultingly forced ["I think we want the nerd from an elite law school" remarkably denigrates "nerds" and non-nerds at the same time], and is fundamentally flawed.

I think there is too much academic in-breeding in the federal judiciary anyway. Why SMU? Why not SMU? Or Tennessee [home of my friend Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds]. Or American University's Washington College of Law [my alma mater]. Where a lawyer went to school has no impact on what kind of mind that lawyer has, or what kind of judge he/she would make. I say that a little diversity would be good for the Court, and the country.

Now, I guess I'm not too surprised at Coulter's ranting about Miers's background. She went to an "elite" undergraduate school [Cornell], an "elite" law school [Michigan], she was an editor of the law review, she clerked for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, and she worked for Floyd Abrams's "elite" law firm in New York City [highly-paid, hundreds of lawyers, most with pedigrees such as Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Virginia, Michigan]. Coulter's looking for a bird of a feather, and appears to take an immediate dislike to an appointee who has the wrong color feathers.

One thing I've figured out over the last 20 years or so: legal elitists tend to a pack mentality; they are most comfortable with people who have similar backgrounds. If I had been top 5% at American University, I might have gotten an interview with Coulter's former firm, had I been so inclined. It's unlikely they would have made me an offer, however. I'm just not in the same club, so to speak.

And at the end, that's what's got Coulter and the other elitists, "liberal" or "conservative," upset. Miers is not in the right club. She doesn't belong.

If we're going to judge this appointee on whether she's "fit" [whatever that means] to sit on the Supreme Court, we should have a reasoned discourse on her qualifications for the job. Maybe she doesn't have the gravitas to deserve the job, but where she matriculated should have nothing to do with the debate.

A lawsuit by the widow of a policeman who was killed when bullets penetrated his bulletproof vest has led to a federal lawsuit and criminal investigation against that manufacturer. Turns out the allegedly defective vests were used by Secret Service, the President, and the First Lady:

Prosecutors have gathered documents showing that Second Chance was alerted as early as 1998 by the Japanese material maker, Toyobo Co., that Zylon had trouble maintaining its protective properties.

By 2001, Second Chance's research chief, Aaron Westrick, was pleading unsuccessfully with his company's president to replace the vests after his own tests showed them degrading, the memos show.

"Lives and our credibility are at stake," Westrick wrote then-Second Chance president Richard Davis in a Dec. 18, 2001, memo. "We will only prevail if we do the right things and not hesitate. This issue should not be hidden for obvious safety issues and because of future litigation."

Westrick urged Davis to "immediately notify our customers of the degradation problems," let those with pending orders cancel them and cease all executive bonuses to save money so the company could pay for a replacement initiative, the memo shows.

But Second Chance customers were not alerted to the problems until September 2003 _ after a California police officer was shot to death wearing the vest and a Pennsylvania officer was seriously wounded.

In the interim, the Secret Service paid $53,000 in 2002 to Second Chance for body armor, enough to equip the president and the security detail that protects him and other VIPs, federal procurement records show.

Legal professionals and government officials familiar with the inquiry confirmed Westrick's account about the Secret Service and Bush. They said the criminal investigation is in addition to a Justice Department lawsuit filed last summer that accuses Second Chance and Toyobo of fraud. The officials spoke only on condition of anonymity, citing grand jury secrecy.

While the purpose of lawsuits is to get compensation for the wronged, this situation illustrates how legal action can force changes -- or at least investigations -- that serve the greater good.

W.R. Grace to asbestos victims: You're not so sick:

Most of the 870 people under a medical plan for Libby-area residents sickened by asbestos exposure have been sent letters saying they no longer have asbestos-related disease, or may not be as sick as they thought.

About 700 people received the letters this month from HNA/Triveras, administrator of a medical plan for W.R. Grace & Co., which operated a vermiculite mine here until 1990. Some health authorities blame the mine for killing 200 people and sickening one of every eight residents.

Apparently, blue is green and red is purple, according to W.R. Grace.

Regarding the ongoing levee problem in New Orleans, why isn't this solution being considered or used? Moreover, why isn't Aqua-Levee bringing its miracle product down to N.O. on its own. If nothing else, imagine the worldwide positive publicity it could garner.

I know the president has more or less backed off his statement that no one expected Katrina to cause so much damage. But I just had to link here, because Nashville lawyer John Day makes a good point: the National weather Service predicted Katrina damage pretty well:

URGENT - WEATHER MESSAGE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW ORLEANS LA 1011 AM CDT SUN AUG 28 2005 ..DEVASTATING DAMAGE EXPECTED HURRICANE KATRINA A MOST POWERFUL HURRICANE WITH UNPRECEDENTED STRENGTH...RIVALING THE INTENSITY OF HURRICANE CAMILLE OF 1969. MOST OF THE AREA WILL BE UNINHABITABLE FOR WEEKS...PERHAPS LONGER. AT LEAST ONE HALF OF WELL CONSTRUCTED HOMES WILL HAVE ROOF AND WALL FAILURE. ALL GABLED ROOFS WILL FAIL...LEAVING THOSE HOMES SEVERELY DAMAGED OR DESTROYED. THE MAJORITY OF INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS WILL BECOME NON FUNCTIONAL. PARTIAL TO COMPLETE WALL AND ROOF FAILURE IS EXPECTED. ALL WOOD FRAMED LOW RISING APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL BE DESTROYED. CONCRETE BLOCK LOW RISE APARTMENTS WILL SUSTAIN MAJOR DAMAGE...INCLUDING SOME WALL AND ROOF FAILURE. HIGH RISE OFFICE AND APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL SWAY DANGEROUSLY...A FEW TO THE POINT OF TOTAL COLLAPSE. ALL WINDOWS WILL BLOW OUT. AIRBORNE DEBRIS WILL BE WIDESPREAD...AND MAY INCLUDE HEAVY ITEMS SUCH AS HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES AND EVEN LIGHT VEHICLES. SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES AND LIGHT TRUCKS WILL BE MOVED. THE BLOWN DEBRIS WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTION. PERSONS...PETS...AND LIVESTOCK EXPOSED TO THE WINDS WILL FACE CERTAIN DEATH IF STRUCK. POWER OUTAGES WILL LAST FOR WEEKS...AS MOST POWER POLES WILL BE DOWN AND TRANSFORMERS DESTROYED. WATER SHORTAGES WILL MAKE HUMAN SUFFERING INCREDIBLE BY MODERN STANDARDS. THE VAST MAJORITY OF NATIVE TREES WILL BE SNAPPED OR UPROOTED. ONLY THE HEARTIEST WILL REMAIN STANDING...BUT BE TOTALLY DEFOLIATED. FEW CROPS WILL REMAIN. LIVESTOCK LEFT EXPOSED TO THE WINDS WILL BE KILLED. AN INLAND HURRICANE WIND WARNING IS ISSUED WHEN SUSTAINED WINDS NEAR HURRICANE FORCE...OR FREQUENT GUSTS AT OR ABOVE HURRICANE FORCE...ARE CERTAIN WITHIN THE NEXT 12 TO 24 HOURS. ONCE TROPICAL STORM AND HURRICANE FORCE WINDS ONSET...DO NOT VENTURE OUTSIDE!

Katrina is a demonstration of the failure of imagination in government -- nobody, apparently, ever imagined it would be so bad, even though we all knew, intellectually, that such a thing was possible. What we need are government people tasked specifically to spin out disaster scenarios, so that prepared responses may be formulated and executed. I think Instapundit suggested just this type of thing long ago. When I get the time, I'll find a link.

By now, y'all have probably heard that Merck, maker of the infamous Vioxx, got slapped with a jury verdict for a whopping $253.5 million, including punitive damages of $229 million. But did you hear that, under Texas law, that punitive verdict is automatically cut to $1.6 million? Let's put it in perspective:

$11.772 Billion: The total worldwide sales of Vioxx from the time it was introduced in 1999 to the time it was removed from the market in 2004.

1999: $472 million ["S&P Affirms Ratings on Merck & Co.; Outlook Stable," Standard & Poor's press release, Business Wire, 2/23/00]

2000: $2.2 billion ["Merck's Strong Performance in 2000 Driven by Five Key Medicines, Chairman Ray Gilmartin Tells Stockholders," Merck & Co., Inc. press release, Business Wire, 4/24/01]

2001: $2.6 billion ["Merck's Continued Focus on Innovation Will Drive Growth, Merck Chairman Tells Stockholders," Merck & Co., Inc. press release, Business Wire, 4/23/02]

2002: $2.5 billion [Merck & Co., Inc Annual Report, 2002, p. 24]

2003: $2.5 billion [Merck & Co., Inc Annual Report, 2003, p.19]

2004: $1.5 billion ["Cholesterol Drugs on Top," Med Ad News, Vol.24 No.5, May 2005]

$505 Million: The amount Merck spent ($505,207,440) on direct to consumer advertising for Vioxx. ["The new face of consumer advertising," Med Ad News, 24(6):1, June 2005, "Consumer ads reach peak, Med Ad News," Pg. 1(8) Vol. 21 No. 6, June 2002, "Direct-to-consumer spending by brand," Med Ad News, Pg. 46 Vol. 19 No. 6, June 2000]

$37.8 Million: The amount Merck's Chief Executive Officer, Raymond Gilmartin made ($37.775 million) in 2004 from a salary, bonus, and stock options that he cashed-in. He was paid a base salary of $1,600,008, and received a bonus of $1,375,000. In addition to this salary and bonus, Gilmartin made $34.8 million by exercising stock options that he previously received from the company. It should also be noted that Merck gave Gilmatin additional stock options in 2004, estimated to be valued at $19.2 million. [Merck & Co. 2005 Proxy Statement, p.24-25; USA Today, 3/30/05; Washington Post, 3/22/05; The New York Times, 5/6/05]

$30.4 Million: The amount Merck spent ($30,390,294) lobbying Members of Congress and Federal agencies between 2000 and 2004. [The Center for Public Integrity]
$1.511 Million The amount Merck's Political Action Committee contributed ($1,511,885) to federal candidates since 1997. [Center for Responsive Politics, as of July 31, 2005]

$675 Million: The amount Merck has set aside to pay its corporate defense lawyers in Vioxx-related lawsuits. [Philadelphia Inquirer, 8/20/05]

Note that last statistic. And they call plaintiff's lawyers greedy?

There's no point belaboring how bad things are in the Katrina-affected areas. The American Trial Lawyers Association has a way of making tax deductible contributions for hurricane relief, though.

As most musicians will tell you, the magic of playing happens when the whole exceeds the sum of the parts. There are relatively few groups that achieve that goal. The Beatles, the Rolling Stones, The Who, Chicago come to mind in this respect, as the solo output of these groups’ respective players seldom matches the music of the group. Loggins and Messina, reunited after 29 years, achieves the goal handily, even effortlessly.

The duo, who were paired almost accidentally back in the early 1970s, only played together for 4 or 5 years, but their music remains entrenched as some of the most notable tuneage of the 1970s. While both Loggins and Messina, as solos, have created some good music, none of what they have done since their amicable parting in 1976 approaches the soul and staying power of the Loggins and Messina catalog.

I drove 200 miles to see them in Atlanta, at Chastain Park Pavilion. Not that I'm superstituos, but because I brough no rain gear other than a couple of small umbrellas, it rained for about 2/3 of the show. Regardless, I had waited 25 years to see them again, and I was not disappointed by their performance. Loggins was his usual animated self, while Messina laid back and sang/played, essentially flawlessly.

Their voices are as pure as they were 30 years ago, which is quite a contrast, compared to other icons, such as Elton John and Paul McCartney, whose voices have suffered changes with age. Harmonies were spot on; I failed to detect any glitches in the vocals.

It was the same with the band, populated with musicians new to the Loggins and Messina scene. There were a couple of songs I thought were played slightly too slow, but it wasn't tentative, it was measured. There were no self-indulgent solos like we heard back in the day. The song selection, while mostly centered on the songs they are “known” for, was fine. As a fan, I always want to hear more, but I was not disappointed by what they played.

Not counting the down time during the intermission, the group played for about 2 ½ hours through on and off [mostly on] rain, and the audience that persevered through the elements was left wanting more.

Ultimately, it was a fine show, demonstrating that this duo needs to be making new music together. Loggins’s tendency toward fluff is perfectly counter-balanced by Messina’s grittiness. Their vocal styles complement each other well. They are both approaching 60 years on; it would be a horrible shame to their musical legacy, as well as the fans that enjoy their music, if they finished this tour and simply went their own separate ways again. If not now, when?

Playlist:
8:05 PM
1. Watching the River Run
2. House At Pooh Corner
3. Travelin Blues
4. Sailin’ The Wind
5. Long Tail Cat6. Country Song/Holiday Hotel
7. Back to Georgia
8. Changes
9. Trilogy
-Lovin Me...
-To Make a Woman Feel Wanted
-Peace of Mind
10. Your Mama Don’t Dance
(End at 9:00 pm)
Intermission
Around 9:20 they started showing clips of them from the 70s
The “General Store” part of the show
11. You Better Think Twice (A Poco Song)
12. Love Song
13. Keep Me In Mind
14. Kind Woman (A Buffalo Springfield Song)
15. Alive and Kickin
16. Growin’
17. Be Free
18. Same Old Wine
19. You Need A Man
20. Vahevala
Encore
21. Angry Eyes
Encore
22. Nobody But You
Encore
23. Danny’s Song
End about 10:55 pm

And then we drove 200 miles home again. Whew!

Based on this footage, thank God the French didn't help us out in Iraq [PG-13 site, caution for underage viwers]!

To no one's surprise, there is no "crisis" in medical malpractice cases. That is the conclusiosn of a study to be published in the July 2005 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, a peer-reviewed publication, and authored by four law professors. Some conclusions:

The number of large paid claims (>$25,000 in 1988 dollars) per year was roughly constant. The number of small paid claims (<$25,000 in 1988 dollars) declined sharply.

Mean and median payouts per large paid claim were $528,000 and $200,000, respectively, in 2002 and were roughly constant over time.

Roughly 5% of paid claims involved payments over $1 million, with little annual variation.

In 2000–2002, there was an average of 4.6 paid claims per 100 practicing Texas physicians per year, down from 6.4 paid claims per 100 practicing physicians per year in 1990–1992.

The total number of closed claim files averaged 25 per 100 practicing Texas physicians per year in 2000–2002. Of these, about 80% involved no payout.
In 2002, payouts to patients were about $515 million and Texas health care spending was about $93 billion, meaning that malpractice payouts equaled 0.6% of health care spending.

Mean and median jury verdicts in trials won by patients were $889,951 and $300,593, respectively, in 2002 and showed no significant upward or downward trend.
The sum of payouts and defense cost rose by about 1% per year. Defense costs, which grew 4.4% annually, drove this increase.

No surprise here. These facts and figures are consistent with my experience in Tennessee, too.

Anti-semitism at UC Irvine. Cloaked in the old rubric of "anti-zionism," the muslim students have hauled out yet again this old chestnut: "Malik Ali unleashed an attack about the Zionist control of the American media, Zionist complicity in the war in Iraq and Zionists’ ability to deflect justified criticism."

And how about this: "More recently in October, somebody scrawled the messages, “Kill the Jews” and 'Make it snow Jewish ash' in a classroom at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. That same month at UC Riverside, a pro-Palestinian display equated the Star of David with a swastika and Zionism with Nazism." It's the bg lie -- scream loud enough and long enough, and people may just start to believe it.

We're back to late 1930s Germany here. We must be very careful not to let this spiral get out of control.

It's official: bloggers beat Tom Daschle. What's interesting is that two of the most vociferous pro-Thune and anti-Daschle blogs were funded by the Thune campaign, and the bloggers closely associated either with Thune or with the GOP.

It's one thing if you're a blogger who just happens to like one candidate over another. It's quite another when you represent yourself as objective, fair and/or balanced, and it turns out after you have significantly influenced a campaign that you were bought, paid for, and propagandizing for your candidate.

Glenn spoke yesterday about poor Helen about having had it with being in he hospital. His comments about being in the hospital long periods of time is right on the mark. It's called ICU psychosis. Basically, the longer you are in the ICU [specifically, and hospital generally], the crazier you get. It happened to my father, when he was in the hospital for nine weeks following cancer surgery in 1992. He just got further and further away from us, to the point where a family friend [and doctor] told us to get him out, no matter what, or he was going to die. We did, and he didn't.

Being in the hospital sucks.

We now have a new law that restricts class action lawsuits, further limiting the rights of people to be compensated for their injuries. The Houston Chronicle, in our president's back yard, is critical of the legislation. The Chronicle's point: what happened to the concepts of limiting federal power, espoused by the republicans? Good question. My answer is that the Republicans never really believed that stuff; they say whaever they need to in advancing ther own agenda. Thus, if it serves their purpose to say "get government out of peoples' lives," they take that tack. When they want something in line witht their iedologu, all of a sudden restrictive legislation that takes perennially state matters out the states' hands becomes perfectly acceptable. Logically inconsistent, but ideologically useful.

Now that class actions are out of the way, it's back to this ridiculous effort to limit, first medical malpractice lawsuits, and ultimately all lawsuits for damages. Here are some interesting truths demonstrating that caps on damages and other limitations as proposed by the Administration do not reduce healthcare costs. Read the whole report, but here are some bullet points:

Despite caps on damages enacted in 19 states, most insurers continued to increase premiums for doctors at a rapid pace, regardless of caps.

States with caps on damages have premiums on average 9.8% higher that states that do not have caps.

Past and present medical malpractice judgments/settlements do not seem to be the driving force behind increases in premiums.

California doctors' premiums rose 450% in the 13 years after passage of caps on damages, and did not go down until California passed, by referendum, insurance reform.

The state of Texas's passed caps on damages in 2003. Its second largest insurer has now requested a 19% increase in premiums, stating that caps do not lead to any significant savings.

Modern Physician: "The real drivers of the rise in premiums over the past four years have been low interest rates, a sour national economy and the legacy of overly aggressive pricing policies in the years before the ‘crisis’ began in late 2000. . . ."

Many of those who support medical malpractice caps – even many tort reform “experts” and insurance company executives, admit that caps will not significantly lower premiums.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that caps will not significantly reduce overall healthcare costs.

Even the Budget Submitted by the Bush Administration – the Administration’s FY ’05 Budget did not state any savings as a result of caps.

"Insurance was cheaper in the 1990s because insurance companies knew that they could take a doctor's premium and invest it, and $50,000 would be worth $200,000 five years later when the claim came in. An insurance company today can't do that." (Victor Schwartz, general counsel to the American Tort Reform Association, "Dose of Legality," Honolulu Star-Bulletin, April 20, 2003).

The number of physicians has risen in every state every year over the last 3 years (of available data – 2000–2002), and the numbers of physicians are higher in every state than they were in 1996. (American Medical Association, “Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the U.S.,” 2003-2004 edition)

In studies done in 1995 and 2004, the median plaintiff award in tort cases has dropped from $50,000 in the 1990s to $37,000 by 2001. (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/civil.htm#state; University of Chicago Law Review, Winter 1998). Between 1992 and 2001 the number of jury trials with punitive damages remained stable (4% to 6%) and the median punitive damage award decreased slightly from $63,000 to $50,000. (Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts in Large Counties, 2001, Thomas H. Cohen, Steven K. Smith, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004).

The General Counsel for the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) – admitted that so-called “frivolous” malpractice cases are “very rare.”

In August 2003, tort reform advocates, including insurance industry executives, were forced to admit their arguments lacked merit after they were placed under oath by the Florida Senate Judiciary Committee. The St. Petersburg Times reported: “The Senate Judiciary Committee, frustrated by the conflicting information given it by different interest groups, discredited much of the medical malpractice rhetoric by placing witnesses under oath. Suddenly, there were no frivolous lawsuits and
Florida was a profitable place for insurance companies to do business after all.” (St. Petersburg Times, 8/17/03)

The bottom line is that this whole "reform" effort is nothing more than a shell game by Big Insurance and the chambers of commerce, in the hopes that a not-well-understood issue slides past the public's eye. It's much harder to undo something that has already been done. Which is exactly what they're trying to do.

Courtesy of my very good friend, Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds, I've got a quote in the Wall Street Journal [see third paragraph from end]. He's a firecracker, that Glenn!

The quote itself is correct, if incomplete. What I said more fully was that by shoving worker's compensation "reform" down our collective throats, he sold down the river not only lawyers like me, but more importantly, the clients whom we represent. That, of course, is the implicit point of Bredesen's worker's compensation "reform" package: to discourage claims by reducing benefits [and resulting attorney's fees], which disinclines lawyers from taking the case, and disinclines the claimant from pursuing benefits because they are so low, relatively speaking. I have had many lawyers here in Knoxville tell me that they will not take any new worker's compensation cases, because there is no way for them to make any profit from the representation. Altruism aside, we do have to make a living. My firm and I still accept meritorious worker's compensation cases, however.

As to Bredesen, there's an old political saw that goes something like this: "he's a bum, but at least he's our bum." The problem with Bredesen is that while his party affiliation is Democrat, he sure has been acting like a Republican. So maybe he's not "our" bum, after all.

Very disturbing news about the Catholic Church's and Pope Pius XII's role in the aftermath of the Holocaust:

The latest scandal to rock the Catholic Church, causing a storm in Italy and elsewhere, follows a familiar pattern: first the crime, then the cover-up. It concerns whether the Church kidnapped Jewish children after the Holocaust and has at its center, yet again, Pius XII, the pope that the Church appears determined to make into a saint despite his criminal role during the Holocaust and, we now learn, quite probably afterward. A Church document of October 23, 1946, recently disclosed in Corriere della Sera, contains papal orders for the French Church forbidding the return of entire classes of Jewish children entrusted to Church institutions during the Holocaust. . . . "If the [Jewish] children have been entrusted [to the Church] by their parents, and if the parents now claim them back, they can be returned, provided the children themselves have not been baptized. It should be noted that this decision of the Congregation of the Holy Office has been approved by the Holy Father."

It took almost 60 years for this scandal to come to light, and while an investigation is warranted, it is unlikely to happen. Given Pius XII's deplorable record during World War II -- "systematically spreading hatred and bigotry against a people while they are being persecuted and slaughtered . . . . approving Nazified race laws persecuting an entire people . . . . failing to command bishops and priests subject to his absolute authority not to participate in the deportations of tens of thousands of people to their deaths . . . . ordering a policy of kidnapping children . . . from people who had been through the Nazi" -- any reasonable person, Catholic or otherwise, must wonder why in the name of all that's holy the Church wants to make a saint out of this man.

The leader of the free world is out to settle some scores:

Sounds like ole George is on to something, doesn't it? And even if he isn't, what's to like about lawyers, anyway?

Well, sad to say, ole George has let us down. He's right that physicians are hit hard these days with insurance costs. And trial lawyers do love to sue them,sometimes frivolously. But there's another player in this drama he overlooked: the insurance industry and it's not clear why. George W. isn't dumb, as Democrats like to say, but he's not the brightest bulb on the Washington Christmas tree either. So maybe he just forgot. Or maybe he found the facts inconvenient.

A study by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, using the experience in California and statistics developed by the federal government's auditing office, makes the case that capping jury awards has had little impact on malpractice insurance rates. What works best, the foundation found, is tighter regulation of the insurance industry.

****

Why does Bush ignore this aspect of the problem? No mystery there. It's politics. This is the most blatantly political administration in Washington in decades, and the trial lawyers are viewed by the Bush-Cheney crowd as simply Democratic auxiliaries. Not without reason, one should add. The trial lawyers have been big sugar daddies for the Democrats for more than a decade.

Bush, the politician, has an understandable beef with the tort bar. But Bush, as a proper president, isn't allowed that luxury. As chief magistrate and the people's tribune, he was elected to solve problems like this, not to indulge petty political peeves. Make no mistake, the physicians' growing insurance burden is a crisis. But it can't be resolved without recognizing the insurance industry as part of the problem.

The industry likes to claim it loses money on malpractice coverage. And some companies undoubtedly do. But on the whole, the industry is profitable beyond the wildest dreams of avarice. Moreover, the opportunity for cooking the books is greater in the insurance dodge than in almost any other line of work. The industry is not subject to federal regulation; indeed, it's exempt even from antitrust laws.

****

This contest involves some of the wealthiest segments of American society and the least regulated: the physicians' lobby, the plaintiffs' bar and the insurance industry. But the greatest potential losers in the struggle are ordinary Americans who need dependable physician care and legal redress when that care is shoddy. They look to the president for help in providing it.

In using the crisis to settle a political score with the trial lawyers, Bush is guilty of presidential malpractice.

He hit the nail on the head.

Robert Landauer:

Bush chose the Illinois site [to redirect his attack, this time to benefit the insurance industry] because "(a) recent study ranked Madison County the number one place in the country for trial lawyers to sue" -- the nation's worst "judicial hellhole," the American Tort Reform Association called it, followed by neighboring St. Clair County. Health care professionals should be fighting illnesses, not "junk lawsuits," Bush declared.

A closer look at the numbers by lawyers, advocacy groups and news reporters presents a less alarming picture locally. Also, analyses by the Congressional Budget Office indicate that Bush's legislative prescriptions won't cut medical costs any more than a tummy tuck will cure a runny nose.

Of nearly 700 malpractice/wrongful death suits filed in Madison County between 1996 and 2003, only 14 resulted in verdicts. Only six of those favored the plaintiffs. Of those six, only one was large enough to be affected by the president's proposed $250,000 cap.

So even in the nation's leading "judicial hellhole," courts throw out most baseless lawsuits early in the process, and the system usually does work.

Did you all get that? Only one verdict in Madison County, Illinois was over $250,000 over a seven year period. What litigation crisis?

The Administration is campaigning for tort limitations the same way it campaigned for the presidency: using fear, truth distortions, and out and out mistruths. As usual, it relies on the public not paying attention. Some of us do.