maven&meddler

I was purusing the page on Sue Lowden’s website about insurance reform, and saw the following:

First, Congress should immediately pass and implement meaningful, national medical liability reform. Even Senator Reid admits that this can save us $54 BILLION. America has the most expensive civil litigation system in the world, and it is estimated that 40 percent of claims are meritless. Medical liability reform not only keeps more doctors practicing medicine today, but it prevents the practice of “defensive medicine” in our hospitals and clinics. The Pacific Research Institute has put the price tag of practicing defensive medicine at $154 BILLION.

Hmmm, I says.

Who is the Pacific Research Institute?

According to SourceWatch.org:

The Pacific Research Institute (PRI) or officially the ‘Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy’, is a think tank founded in 1979 whose stated vision is the promotion of “the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility. The Institute believes these principles are best encouraged through policies that emphasize a free economy, private initiative, and limited government.” The institute is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, and had $4.9M in revenue in 2005. ^[1] The Pacific Research Institute has associated with other think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute.

Aha! The Cato Institute! That bastion of anything goes Libertarianism.

It’s also interesting to note the history of the Pacific Research Institute and the Tobacco Industry. That seems a bit less than savory.

Whatever floats her boat, I guess. But, I think real Republicans - Eisenhower Republicans - would all be turning over in their graves.

P.S. - take a look at what Pollster.com has to say about her goofy ‘average mom’ - much like Leona Helmsley - attack ads. The best part: scroll down through the comments. Then go over to FactFCheck.org for some more…

A couple of excerpts:

‘Former Nevada state Sen. Sue Lowden, who is running for the Republican nomination to challenge Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in November, goes after Reid in a new ad for trying to force “one-size-fits-all government health care” on all Americans.

Maybe “one-size-fits-all government health care” is a plausible description of the systems in some other countries: Canada or the U.K., for instance. But the Senate-passed health care overhaul, which Reid shepherded through that body on Christmas Eve, builds on our system of private health insurance, provided through employers or purchased individually. And in fact, the Senate bill would likely present individuals with more choices than they have at present, notably through newly created exchanges where any number of private insurance companies would compete for the business of millions of currently uninsured Americans.’

Finally, Lowden claims the legislation will “push us further into debt.” But that conflicts with the analysis of CBO and Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation, which say the Senate bill would reduce the deficit by $132 billion over 10 years.The House bill would yield about the same net reduction in the deficit, $138 billion over the same period, by the calculations of CBO and JCT. A spokesman for Lowden’s campaign told us that support for her statement can be found on the Web site of the conservative Heritage Foundation. That’s true. For example, this post by James Capretta, who used to work in the Office of Management and Budget under President George W. Bush, argues that certain cuts and other steps outlined in health care overhaul legislation are unlikely to happen.  Lowden has a right to believe any analysis she likes. But we’d note that, as hard as it is to forecast anything 10 years out, a projection like Capretta’s adds still more conjecture to the calculation, and comes from a partisan source

I mean, even if you are some sort of moderate, clear-thinking, person who is a registered Republican - I know, that confuses me, too - then why would you want to vote for this vapid Leona Helmsley wannabe with more potentially toxic political baggage than a Pullman car?