<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Thomas Geoghegan: &#8220;See You in Court&#8221;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/07/thomas-geoghegan-see-you-in-court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/07/thomas-geoghegan-see-you-in-court/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:14:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Thomas Geoghegan runs for Congress		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/07/thomas-geoghegan-see-you-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-38412</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thomas Geoghegan runs for Congress]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:14:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7284#comment-38412</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[...] His most recent book See You in Court: How the Right Made America a Lawsuit Nation (2007, New Press, and out in paperback this month) showed independence of mind and a willingness to rethink received ideas, as usual, but disappointed in other respects. For one thing, Geoghegan seemed more interested in blowing off steam against conservatives and litigation reformers than in trying to understand what they actually think about the issues he raised. The result was that some of his shots fell very wide of the mark, while he missed other points that might have advanced his case. Ted wrote a much more extended critique of the book that is linked here. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] His most recent book See You in Court: How the Right Made America a Lawsuit Nation (2007, New Press, and out in paperback this month) showed independence of mind and a willingness to rethink received ideas, as usual, but disappointed in other respects. For one thing, Geoghegan seemed more interested in blowing off steam against conservatives and litigation reformers than in trying to understand what they actually think about the issues he raised. The result was that some of his shots fell very wide of the mark, while he missed other points that might have advanced his case. Ted wrote a much more extended critique of the book that is linked here. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Vail Beach		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/07/thomas-geoghegan-see-you-in-court/comment-page-1/#comment-38097</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vail Beach]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 21:05:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7284#comment-38097</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[You know, it doesn&#039;t seem all that relevant whether Geoghegan wants to blame the right.  It is much more important in the grand scheme of things that he is telling his compatriots on the left that jackpot litigation that mostly enriches trial lawyers is unsustainable as social policy.  This is like telling the Democrats they ought to sever ties with Big Labor. The moneymen will say it&#039;s simply impossible; the Democratic party can&#039;t get out of bed in the morning without a regular dose of trial lawyer money. Tort reform is bitter medicine that they probably won&#039;t take, but at least now someone with the correct political pedigree has validated the concern for liberal policy wonks and reporters who have been afraid to voice such views or haven&#039;t given them much thought. 

It comes up especially with respect to a couple of industries on which liberals are very focused right now:  Health care and auto manufacturing.  Lawsuits are huge cost drivers that will impede what Dem policymakers hope to accomplish during Obama&#039;s term.  They can&#039;t pretend those costs are irrelevant. 

As for Geoghegan&#039;s finger-pointing -- oh hell, why not admit it?  He&#039;s got a point. Tort law is, in effect, the privatization of regulation.  Between the two, regulation is far more preferable to business if it is conducted predictably, fairly, and judiciously. Tort law is irrational and disproportionate in its effects, and hard to undo, whereas unworkable regulation can always be changed by legislative efforts.  

In short, despite your disagreements with Geoghegan, you owe him big time. He&#039;s joined your fight. Welcome him aboard.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know, it doesn&#8217;t seem all that relevant whether Geoghegan wants to blame the right.  It is much more important in the grand scheme of things that he is telling his compatriots on the left that jackpot litigation that mostly enriches trial lawyers is unsustainable as social policy.  This is like telling the Democrats they ought to sever ties with Big Labor. The moneymen will say it&#8217;s simply impossible; the Democratic party can&#8217;t get out of bed in the morning without a regular dose of trial lawyer money. Tort reform is bitter medicine that they probably won&#8217;t take, but at least now someone with the correct political pedigree has validated the concern for liberal policy wonks and reporters who have been afraid to voice such views or haven&#8217;t given them much thought. </p>
<p>It comes up especially with respect to a couple of industries on which liberals are very focused right now:  Health care and auto manufacturing.  Lawsuits are huge cost drivers that will impede what Dem policymakers hope to accomplish during Obama&#8217;s term.  They can&#8217;t pretend those costs are irrelevant. </p>
<p>As for Geoghegan&#8217;s finger-pointing &#8212; oh hell, why not admit it?  He&#8217;s got a point. Tort law is, in effect, the privatization of regulation.  Between the two, regulation is far more preferable to business if it is conducted predictably, fairly, and judiciously. Tort law is irrational and disproportionate in its effects, and hard to undo, whereas unworkable regulation can always be changed by legislative efforts.  </p>
<p>In short, despite your disagreements with Geoghegan, you owe him big time. He&#8217;s joined your fight. Welcome him aboard.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
