Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.
I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?
That already exists for those who receive free legal representation as a right in criminal matters. It's called the Public Defender. For those who receive legal representation as a right in certain types of civil cases, it's called Legal Aid (or similar, depending on the State). Both of these are usually staffed by attorneys who are State or local employees drawing a reasonable civil servant salary. Occasionally they are private attorneys drawn from a pool, assigned to handle a specific case and paid a standard fee for their services.
Do you mean to imply teachers are not allowed to choose work in private schools or for private businesses such as tutoring centers, curriculum developers or other related fields if they do not want to be government employees?
I was being facetious goldcatt. But if the prez wants to control executive compensation, perhaps it's time to limit "windfall" compensation from outrageous settlements. The lawyer/politicians have no problem demonizing the "bankers" and limiting Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement to doctors, so why not tort reform? I'm sure they have it in other socialist countries.
Rhetorical question of course.
And you and I both know the only limits that can be placed on compensation hinge on the fact that the private entities paying the salaries are using public funds to do so. Government can place limits on how government money is spent, or nobody has to accept the funds. That's the way it works.
If banks want to take billions in welfare and bailouts, do you honestly believe there should be no limits on the puposes for which it is spent? Why are these entities so different from individuals receiving government handouts?
I've said before I'm not completely against the idea of some tort refrom, depending how it's done. The advertising issue that's been brought up is one way, there are others. Tighten the holes where actual abuse takes place, but the core of the system works.
There are good reasons for the laws we have now, and what you don't seem to understand is with all the demonizing of lawyers that's been done by certain folks in that same government med mal cases are extremely difficult to pursue let alone win. It's already regulated and limited at the start. How far do you want to go, and at what cost to those who are actually harmed by incompetent medical professionals?
And just as important, how much are you as a conservative willing to use the power of goverment to restrict private business, much of it small business, that exists entirely on private capital simply because you can't stand the people who run it?