Malpractice medicine leaves bad taste
Mayor Brad Cole's medical malpractice ordinance was passed by members of Carbondale City Council 4-1 last night, to the discomfiture of some and the relief of many (or vice versa), reports Nicole Sack -- because the Mayor wouldn't let audience members comment. "We've already had two hours of citizens' comments," said Cole . . . so "further discussion would be superfluous." (or words to that effect)
Since the ordinance probably will not hold up in court (as almost everyone agrees) it's a moot question. Although Cole deserves
credit for making the effort . . . whether 3x the amount of actual damages is a fair formula is another matter.
Why Chris Wissmann "flip-flopped" on his previous "no" vote is another other matter. "I don't think it will help [the doctors]," Wissmann said, "but I am willing to entertain it." Since Chris edits an entertainment guide in town, this could be a conflict of interest. Or at the very least, disinterest in conflict.
According to Sack, "In return for [Wissmann's] affirmative vote, he wanted a public commitment to create a physicians disclosure ordinance that would monitor doctors who have been reckless in past medical treatment but continue to practice."
In the Daily Egyptian Chris is quoted saying: "Passing this ordinance would be a symbolic gesture. . . . I'm willing to let this go because, in value, I think it is symbolic."
Symbolic of what? That homemakers and low-income earners do not deserve the same amount of "pain and suffering" as someone who makes more money? Does Wissmann's "symbolic" vote mean no 'public commitment'?
This blog will write to Chris for answers.