Jack, I don't think tort reform is in conflict with the free market. One of my examples above shows clearly how malpractise suits can interfere with the free market by reducing choice in medical care providers creating less competition. Tort reform would simply set standards for reasonable awards. In Mississippi the malpractise situation finaly got so bad that doctors were fleeing the state and they were in serious danger of having a health care crisis. The state then had to limit awards to settle things down. Civil law in this country was intended to be a way for an injured party to receive fair compensation, not hit the jackpot. Unfotunately the end user pays all costs and this system does increase the cost of medical care. If we were to approach this problem in a true free market sense we would adopt a loser pays system of civil law.
I we could eliminate the embedded cost of insurance, reduce the threat of malpractise and get government out of the doctors office our per capita expenditure on health care would be drastically reduced. I will try to find real, published data for you. Peter