would trigger the reductions that are needed in the several areas that are raising the costs of medicare, and have to deal with the major institutions. you can go down the list and, again, these things are all linked together. you start at the beginning of this saying, whether you re talking about health care and you re talking about the doctors, a trial bar, hospitals, insurance, pharmaceutical, medical devices, et cetera, everybody has a vested interest. but this is a time for the nation to pull together and focus onç where we can wring o savings on all these multiple levels. the example i just cited was in health care, but i think it was reuters who says something like 700 billion annually is gone, wasted in that area. no wonder we re headed towards 20% of gross domestic product going to health care, and we shouldn t be focused on taking away people s benefits. we should be focused on cutting
who have insurance actually looked over the bill and said, what was this item? why did that cost so much? the assumption here that the insurance is going to take care of it, without ever questioning is one of the things we do in the bill is require a lot of transparency on these issues so people can know what they re actually getting or not getting. do you think the democrats, if you re going to have to come up with the 50-plus votes even to do the reconciliation piece of this bill, do you think the democrats are willing to do the heavy lifting against the trial bar, to go after the trial lawyers on malpractice, even if you re not getting a single republican vote for it? well, i think dick durbin, senator durbin made an eloquent case the other day at the summit about the dangers associated by just eliminating the private litigation or putting caps in these areas that are too low. the president has suggested, others have in fact in the bill, trying some pilot programs with states to
i don t know if anyone objects to that. even the trial bar doesn t want to see frivolous lawsuits being brought. the idea you re going to wipe them outaltogether doesn t make any sense. we lose 100,000 people a year because of medical errors in this country. 100,000 a year. the idea that you re going to excuse that or make it the exercise is going to be something you have to pay a price for. i think that s a mistake. having a sense of balance about it makes sense. i think the president has done that. let s talk about the stock market, your bailiwick, trying to get some kind of consumer protection. you talk about not understanding the bill you get at a hospital or not paying attention. most people don t understand what s going on inside wall street. i don t. i don t know what derivatives are. i trust the guy who advises me. i don t get all that stuff. the question comes down to, how do you house the consumer protector? is it right to put it in the federal reserve where the influence t
states to see if we can t do a better job of reducing the frivolous lawsuits where they exist. i think it s a major step forward. it needs resources. the president offered that today as one of the suggestions. i don t know if anyone objects to that. even the trial bar doesn t want to see frivolous lawsuits being brought. the idea you re going to wipe them out all together doesn t make any sense. we lose 100,000 people a year because of medical errors in this country. the idea that you re going to excuse that or make it the exercise is going to be something you have to pay a price for i think is a mistake. having a sense of balance about it makes sense. i think the president has done that. let s talk about the stock market, trying to get some kind of consumer protection. you talk about not understanding the bill you get at a hospital or not paying attention. most people don t understand what s going on inside wall street. i don t know what the derivatives are, i trust the guy who advi
could haven t done much better than what we wound up with. that is to say a system that rewards people, pays hospitals and doctors and others more for how much they do, not how well they do it that says to the consumer it s free to you. you are using someone else s credit card. take all you like. lays a heavy dose of defensive medicine on top of that thanks to the trial bar. and the plan the president, all the versions i ve seen simply take and magnify the worst features of the current system. at the dead end, the worst option is full speed ahead but that s the way the majority opted for now. neil: governor, finished reading mitt romney s book last night ahead of my interview with the former governor and his wife tomorrow. one thing struck me as i was getting ready to interview you.