|
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Michigan Girl Missing, With Convicted Killer; White House Preparing to Respond to North Korean MiG Incident by Official Protest
Aired March 4, 2003 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST (voice-over): Today on TALKBACK LIVE, AMBER Alert for a teenager who might have run off with a convicted killer she met on the Internet. Have you check your kids' buddy list lately? We'll have the latest on the investigation.
Also, if a doctor makes mistake on you, how much money do you deserve? The president calls for limits on medical malpractice awards. We'll have the debate.
Then, drumbeat to war. Can diplomacy with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il despite his nuclear saber rattling?
And with or without the U.N., has time run out for Iraq's Saddam Hussein? Will the U.S. make its move sometime next week?
The talk starts right now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
NEVILLE: Hello, everybody. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville. Want to let you know that we're waiting on a news live conference from Michigan where an AMBER Alert has been issued for a missing 14-year-old girl. Lindsay Ryan was discovered missing on Saturday and police have speculated she could be in the company of a 56-year-old killer she wrote to on the Internet. Her parents made this public plea for her safe return.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAROL RYAN, MOTHER: We all love you. We've had a million phone calls. All your friends are calling.
PATRICK RYAN, FATHER: We love you, every one of us. And we're hoping for your safe return.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: And we are joined now by CNN's Jeff Flock who is following this story with the latest -- Jeff.
JEFF FLOCK, CNN CHICAGO BUREAU CHIEF: Indeed, Arthel, a parent's nightmare. The parents are here. We hope to hear from them in just a few moments as well as the Cass County, Michigan sheriff with the latest.
We have just learned this since our last report on CNN about 10 or 15 minutes ago. Apparently, this young lady as well as the suspect in the case have been sighted at least three times in the Western part of the U.S., twice in Wyoming and once near the Utah/Nevada state line the last time, a little more than 24 hours ago.
They also believe that the young lady has now dyed her hair black and released what that would look like. That is what Lindsay Diane Ryan would look like with black hair. If -- Jeffrey, I don't know what you're shooting there, but if you're able to widen out a bit perhaps you see the man she is believed to be traveling with, a 57- year-old man who has spent at least a dozen or so years in connection with a murder in prison.
And while this not clearly a classics abduction, perhaps the class sense, still a nightmare for the parents. And again, Arthel, hoping to hear from them in just a short time, as well as from the sheriff on just what the latest here is -- Arthel.
NEVILLE: Jeff, now is this man considered dangerous? I know he's out of prison now for murder back in the '70s, I believe...
(CROSSTALK)
FLOCK: Since having been -- in fact, '94, I believe, he was released and has not had any brushes with authorities since then, near as they can tell.
Is he believed dangerous? Well, the fact that $4,000 in cash as well as six guns and ammunition disappeared from the Ryan home as well as Lindsey, lead authorities to believe, yes, in fact, he is dangerous.
NEVILLE: And, Jeff, let's go back to the beginning of this relationship, this so-called relationship. Apparently the two met at a church, correct? And that they kind of nurtured that relationship over the Internet.
FLOCK: Well, yes. The scariest thing in the world, I suppose was to hear that your child had developed a relationship and met someone on the Internet. Apparently this was not the classic case of this, but they did in fact correspondent via e-mail and apparently there was some arrangement made for her to leave the home and meet with him in the early morning hours Saturday morning. And she has been missing since then.
NEVILLE: OK, Jeff Flock, we will go back to Michigan when that news conference takes place. Thank you so much for that report.
FLOCK: Thanks, Arthel.
NEVILLE: In the meantime, North Korea, Iraq and terrorism. It's the three-headed monster facing the U.S. right now and there is movement on all three fronts this hour. We're going to begin with North Korea, where officials are calling joint U.S./South Korean military exercises preparation for an attack.
And in Washington, White House officials are preparing to respond to the North's latest provocation, the weekend interception of an Air Force spy jet by North Korean MiG fighters. CNN's Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre has been covering this story, he joins us now.
And, Jamie, I understand the U.S. is going to lodge an official protest. And if you could tell us when this might happen.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, the protest is being launched by the State Department. I'm not exactly sure the timing. It may have already been launched. I'm just not up on that here.
The protest is essentially that the U.S. plane was well in international air space. This is not something that was a close call. It was 150 miles off shore, this RC-135S Cobra Ball surveillance plane. And it was flying in a -- basically an established route that U.S. planes take when they fly these missions.
Now, temporarily, planes flying that route have been stood down, was the word that the U.S. Pacific Command used, while they decide exactly how they are going to proceed. One consideration is possibly using armed escort planes to protect the U.S. plane. But that's not really something the U.S. is anxious to do. The Pentagon believes that in some respects that would set a bad precedent, that the idea that unarmed surveillance planes ought to be able to fly in clear international air space without having any sort of fighter protection.
So they're not really leaning toward that, but they are considering exactly what the next step should be.
NEVILLE: But indeed, they definitely have to consider what the next step should be because this is a situation that could escalate into something far, far dangerous -- more dangerous than...
MCINTYRE: It's not clear how -- it's not clear, what, you know, if the North Korean MiGs and there were four of them really had any hostile intent. There was a lot of debate yesterday at the Pentagon about whether one of the MiGs locked on to the U.S. plane or whether it just simply acquired it with a target acquisition radar.
It now appears they may have in fact lock on to the plane. But this is something that pilots...
NEVILLE: OK, Jamie, if you -- I have to interrupt here. Pardon me. But I want to go to Jones, Michigan where the sheriff, Joseph Underwood, Cass County, Michigan sheriff is speaking out regarding Lindsay Ryan. It's her father, actually at the podium.
(INTERRUPTED BY LIVE EVENT)
NEVILLE: And we are going to take a break right now. We're going to go back to this talking about North Korea. With North Korea behaving badly, many are asking, who is the greater threat, Kim Jong Il or Saddam Hussein? Of course, we'll talk about that when we come back.
And still ahead -- will the U.S. go it alone and abandon a second U.N. resolution on Iraq? We'll talk with our high power diplomacy happened over the weekend. Andrea Koppel is going to give us that story.
And another al Qaeda suspect is captured. This time the son of a Muslim militant involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the man when paid for the 9/11 attacks is in U.S. custody -- or is in custody. Are you feeling more secure, is the question?
We're going to talk about that as TALKBACK LIVE continues in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Today on TALKBACK LIVE, doctors say malpractice insurance is driving them out of business, and the president agrees. He wants a cap on insurance payments. How much do you think doctors should pay for the mistakes they make?
The talk continues in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, every one.
The full-court press is on at the United Nations, where the United States is trying to win passage of a second resolution that would pave the way for military action in Iraq. But what happens if the U.S. does not line up the votes to win passage? Would the White House try to stop the vote?
Joining us now with some answers, CNN's State Department correspondent, Andrea Koppel.
All right, Andrea. So the U.S. says that they will now seek a vote on this second U.N. resolution. But then there's talk that the U.S. just might not seek that vote if administration officials cannot actually get the votes needed to pass this second resolution.
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: That's exactly right, Arthel.
The magic number right now is nine. That is the number that the U.S. needs, the minimum number that it needs to pass a Security Council resolution. There are 15 members; the U.S. needs nine. The focus right now is on a group of six Security Council members. They are known as the U-6, or the undecided six. These are popular countries. Three are them are African states, Angola, Cameroon and Guinea. Two of them are Latin American, Chile and Mexico. And then, of course, there's Pakistan.
In fact, the diplomacy that's going on right now -- some of it is going on is very public, that we can all see. Secretary of State Powell today gave five television interviews with members -- journalists from members of the Security Council. He's giving a speech tomorrow at a Washington, D.C., think tank.
Some of it is secret. It's happening behind closed doors. Secretary of State Powell held a secret meeting in recent days with the Mexican foreign minister. The U.S. didn't want to talk about that because they don't want to show the kind of pressure that they are having to put on, in some instance,s to get the votes that they need, Arthel.
But it remains to be seen, if the U.S. does not have those nine votes, do not look for the U.S. to introduce a resolution next week. Right now what they're doing, lobbying for the votes and waiting for the report that Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei are supposed to give to the Security Council again on Friday.
NEVILLE: So then, Andrea, if the administration is not talking about those private meetings like the one with Mexico's foreign minister, then we have no idea if those diplomatic discussions are successful or not.
KOPPEL: Well, that's why you have me.
I talked to the officials privately and some of them, in fact, have said that, in fact, the meeting with the Mexican foreign minister apparently didn't go as well as the U.S. would have liked. But, in fact, the U.S. feels Secretary Powell, I'm told, is quite confident that the three African states are on board. Pakistan has signaled in recent days that it's on board.
So just because some of the meetings and the phone calls and what not are happening privately doesn't mean that the U.S. won't have the votes. You really won't know until after the Blix/ElBaradei report. That, again -- remember, the last time they gave their report, it was, you know, the French foreign minister delivered his remarks and there was applause in the Council chamber. That had really never happened before.
So you -- there's a whole dynamic that takes over after one of these reports, and clearly there are a lot of governments, a lot of countries, a lot of citizens, who are on edge right now, waiting on pins and needles to see which way the Iraq story is going to go.
NEVILLE: But quickly, Andrea, before I let you go, all of that could be for naught if, in fact, Russia says, Hey, guess what, vetoing this.
KOPPEL: You are absolutely right.
And I'll tell you what. The big question -- you're absolutely right to mention France, one of the permanent members of the Security Council with veto power. But the U.S. privately thinks that President Putin will abstain. The big question is, what will the French president, Jacques Chirac ,do and right now officials say they do not know.
NEVILLE: Don't know. Andrea Koppel, thank you very much for that insight. And coming up -- oh, right now we're going to have some guests joining us.
Max Boot, who is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of "The Savage Wars of Peace, Small Wars and the Rise of American Power, " and Amy Goodman. Amy is a journalist who hosts "Democracy Now," a daily radio newsmagazine on Pacifica Radio.
And...
AMY GOODMAN, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Hi, Arthel.
NEVILLE: Sure. Hi. How are you?
GOODMAN: Good.
NEVILLE: OK, you know what? Amy, I'm going to start with you today then. Ask you this: Is it time for face-to-face discussions between top level U.S. diplomats and Kim Jong Il, because you heard about what happened recently.
GOODMAN: Yes, well, I definitely think it is. But I want to go back to something Andrea just said. She talked about the six countries that the U.S. is courting now to get their vote at the U.N. Security Council.
The big untold story that is infuriating these countries is that a National Security Agency, top secret memo, has surfaced in a British newspaper. "The Observer, " that shows that the National Security Agency, even more secret than the CIA and much larger, is eavesdropping on, is tapping the home phones and offices, as well as intercepting the faxes of these countries on the U.N. Security Council so that they can sway the vote and get a sense of what these diplomats are talking about. The U.S. is engaging in espionage against these members of the U.N. Security Council.
That is a story that's not being told. Today "The Baltimore Sun" did do a big piece on it, but the networks are not talking about it. And it's one that behind the scenes these delegations, like Chile, for example, is saying, what? Are we back in the age of Augusto Pinochet and the dictatorship? What is the USA doing right now?
NEVILLE: Well, Max, clearly there are diplomatic discussions going on at many levels. Andrea Koppel just reported that some behind closed doors. Just your take on all of this. Do you think that still talking about the second U.N. resolution and perhaps a possible vote. Do you think a vote is necessary? And if in fact the second resolution is not passed, is it a good idea for the U.S. to go ahead with military action anyway?
MAX BOOT, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: I just want to correct something you said, Arthel, which is the second resolution. That is how a lot of people refer to it. But more accurately, you should talk about the 18th resolution. Because there have been 17 U.N. resolutions, passed already, since 1991. And Saddam Hussein has violated all of them. Now 1441, which was the last resolution passed unanimously by the Security Council on November 8 was a very strong resolution. It said Saddam Hussein has one final chance to disarm.
Now, I think everybody agrees at this point he has not taken advantage of that opportunity. He has thrown a few bones at the weapons inspectors in the form of the missiles that he is destroying. But he is not completing his task of disarmament.
And a number of Democrats, including Dick Holbert (ph), the former U.N. ambassador, say we don't need another resolution, 1441 was enough. That...
NEVILLE: Right, and you know that's why everyone is referring to this pending vote as the second resolution.
(CROSSTALK)
GOODMAN: Tell Tony Blair that he doesn't need a second resolution. The vast majority of people in Britain, the vast majority of people in Spain, the vast majority of people in Italy, over and over again, the world is saying no to war. It's why Tony Blair is pushing George Bush to get that second resolution.
NEVILLE: Correct. I have to take a break right now. Max, after the break I'll let you respond. I do have to go to break right now.
Coming up next, Attorney General John Ashcroft calls him the single most wanted terrorist after Osama bin Laden. So what are authorities learning from terror suspects Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and does his arrest mean the White House is winning the war on terror? We're back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: All right. Max Boot, before the break, I cut you off. So, go ahead, if you would and complete your thought, Max.
BOOT: Well, it's silly to suggest that we absolutely need an 18th resolution in to go in and dispose Saddam Hussein. In 1998 when Britain and America bombed Iraq in the Clinton administration, they didn't even bother seeking a single U.N. resolution.
Recently when France has sent 3,000 troops into the Ivory Coast, France didn't ask for a U.N. resolution. So I'm not sure why we should be bound by seeking an 18th U.N. resolution, when we already have 17.
GOODMAN: Ask the populations of most countries in the world. Just in the last few weeks, some 30 million people protested in the streets from Cape Town to San Francisco, saying no to war.
Right now a lot of people in this country feel that President Bush is destabilizing the world and it's actually increasing the possibility that we will once again be the victims of a terrorist attack. It's the front page of... (CROSSTALK)
GOODMAN: ... a poll taken in New York says most New Yorkers are terrified that its...
BOOT: Amy...
GOODMAN: ... the U.S. engages in a preemptive attack against Iraq that we will be attacked here at home.
BOOT: Amy, luckily we don't live under mob rule. And that people who take to the streets with placards are not the ones who set policy. As a matter of fact, both houses of Congress have voted overwhelmingly, including a majority of the Senate Democrats, to give President Bush a free hand, and he is in fact supported by 60 percent of the people in the latest Gallup-CNN people.
In Britain Tony Blair has won a three to one majority in the House of Commons for his policy and we have the support of 18 states in Europe behind what we are doing, as well as most of Iraq's neighbors.
So don't talk to me about whether this war is popular or not. We have states of the world on our side, we have American and British public opinion on our side. And I don't care what a few protesters in the streets are chanting about. That's not how we run ourselves and that's not how a democracy should function.
(CROSSTALK)
GOODMAN: Max, I think you need a new abacus. The majority of people in this country are opposed to war, as...
BOOT: What are you talking about? Look at the CNN-Gallup poll...
(CROSSTALK)
GOODMAN: You cannot deny it, Max. In fact, tomorrow, all over this country, high school and college students will be walking out of their classrooms in protest of war. We have never seen the mass rebellion against the U.S. waging war like we have seen now. And you still haven't responded to that last point that the U.S. is engaged in a mass spying campaign against U.N. Security Council members that has just been revealed...
BOOT: Fine, well me respond.
(CROSSTALK)
BOOT: Let me respond to your conspiracy mongering. In the first place...
NEVILLE: Make it short, Max.
BOOT: There's a lot of questions about whether that memo which was published in a British newspaper is authentic. But even if it is...
GOODMAN: The National Security Agency has not denied it.
BOOT: Amy, would you let me finish, please? Even if it is authentic it doesn't trouble me that America is using our assets to spy on other communities around the world. That's why we have an intelligence community. I think that's what the American people expect our intelligence community to do, which is to gather intelligence.
And it's not a scandal that they are doing that. They are protecting us. And I think you ought to be more supportive of the intelligence agency which this weekend captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, one of the leading terrorists in the world.
NEVILLE: And you know what, Max? Thank you for that segway because coming up next we're going to talk about that arrest and there are new developments. We'll talk to him after the break.
In the meantime, Amy Goodman and Max Boot, thank you so much for joining us here on TALKBACK LIVE. We'll see you again.
GOODMAN: Thank you.
NEVILLE: OK, and we will be back in moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: OK. We're going to turn our attention now to the war on terrorism. The administration is glowing over the weekend arrest of suspected al Qaeda kingpin Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. And today, Attorney General John Ashcroft, along with FBI Director Robert Mueller and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to report on recent successes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL: The capture of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed by Pakistani authorities, in coordination with the CIA, is a severe blow to al Qaeda that could destabilize their terrorist network worldwide. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, "the brain," is the al Qaeda mastermind of the September 11 attacks and Osama bin Laden's senior terrorist attack planner. Next to bin Laden, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was the FBI's most wanted terrorist.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK. CNN national security correspondent David Ensor joins us now. And, David, before we get to this arrest, one of our guests earlier here on TALKBACK LIVE referred to a report claiming that NSA was listening to the undecided countries, listening in on telephone calls, maybe intercepting faxes, et cetera. Can you give us details on that?
DAVID ENSOR, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: I can only tell you that I talked to the spokeswoman of the National Security Agency and she said they have absolutely no comment on the story. I don't know if it's true or not. The NSA under its charter cannot eavesdrop on conversations inside the United States. But outside the United States, it can, and I really don't know whether the story is accurate or not.
NEVILLE: OK, David, thank you. So, in the meantime, though, we're going to talk about this. And that is, that today Mueller said that hundreds of attacks were averted with the arrest of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. If you could tell us what sort of information are interrogators getting from him?
ENSOR: Well each day that passes since Saturday, Arthel, we are getting a more accurate picture of what an incredible coup this was. Not only did they get the operations chief of al Qaeda and he's in U.S. hands being interrogated now, but they also got his laptop, they got his cell phones, they got his notebooks. And the U.S. intelligence officials are not actually talking about this, but other U.S. sources are telling us that within that -- those documents and other materials, are the names of hundreds of people that they believe may be al Qaeda operatives.
Some of them they believe may be in the United States. There is an awful lot of intelligence of law enforcement work going on right now to try to track down the many leads that are all of a sudden in the lap of U.S. intelligence and law enforcement people. So it's a huge win.
Now, as to the interrogation, again, those that are interrogating him, the CIA, they are not talking about it. We are hearing from other sources that, while Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is talking, he is not useful. At least not so far.
However, officials have said in the past that all these senior al Qaeda people, while they may be tough nuts to crack, in the end, they do talk. And the U.S. stresses it doesn't use what is legally defined as torture to get them to talk, but ultimately it does get what it regards as useful intelligence out of every single one of these prisoners, and there are now getting to be quite a few of them -- Arthel.
NEVILLE: Did officials announce what sort of attacks might have been averted with this arrest?
ENSOR: We haven't heard anything specific about specific attacks. And Mueller did not say that any specific attacks were prevented. What he -- what they are saying is that with this massive amount of intelligence they've now got they may be able to avert attacks. And there is some information, according to some of the sources, in this material, in the laptop and elsewhere, suggesting general discussion about different types of attacks that might occur. But no blue prints and nothing specific we're told.
NEVILLE: Sure. And quickly, David, we're understanding now that Sheikh Rahman's son was arrested and has been in custody since February. And of course the guy who paid for the 9-11 attacks, he was nabbed along with Mohammed. How big a catch is that? ENSOR: Well, the financier guy, I don't have his name right in front of me -- Harawi (ph), I think it is -- is a Saudi citizen. He is of interest, officials say. They're saying he's not a big fish but he may know things.
He's certainly worth interrogating and that is happening. And, as you say, Sheikh Rahman's son, Mohammed, was taken in another raid February 13 in Quetta. He is also being questioned by the U.S.
NEVILLE: OK. David Ensor, thank you so much.
OK. Up next, we're going to talk about attempts to cap medical malpractice claims. Doctors say costly premiums are putting them out of business. But opponents point to the bungled heart-lung transplant that ended in death for 17-year-old Jessica Santilan. They say she is a prime example of why limits are a bad idea. We'll talk about that after the break.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Here's a question for you: Could you be without a doctor just when you need one most? The American Medical Association said there's a nationwide physician crisis. Doctors in at least 18 states are threatening to either limit or leave their practices or set out their shingles somewhere else because of the rising cost of medical malpractice insurance.
President Bush proposes to cap medical malpractice awards, limiting them to no more than $250,000 for pain and suffering and another $250,000 for punitive damages. But that's too limiting for Sherry Keller, who was paralyzed after what she says was a mistake by her doctor.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHERRY KELLER, ALLEGED MEDICAL MALPRACTICE VICTIM: In my dreams I suffer. I am awakened many times during the night because of problems in my spinal cord. I can't even sleep through the night.
How amount -- what kind of money is going to compensate that? None. But to say that $250,000 is more than enough is an insult.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: Here to debate the issue are Peter Fenn, a Democratic political consultant, and Dan Perrin, executive director of the Archer Medical Savings Account, a coalition of some 40 health care groups. I want to welcome both of you gentlemen.
OK, Peter, the president wants to put a cap on medical malpractice awards. Is $250,000 enough?
PETER FENN, DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL CONSULTANT: I don't think so, Arthel. I'll tell you, I think there's no question that we should do something about nuisance lawsuits, but that's not what this is about. If you look at this recent case, for example, of 17-year-old Jessica, who has lost her life because of a switch in the blood types, you look at cases where people who have -- who are 2 years old, 3 years old, are the victims of malpractice, whose lives are destroyed. You know, who need medical care for the rest of their lives.
You cannot say that $250,000 covers it. It just doesn't.
NEVILLE: And, Dan, your thoughts on that.
DAN PERRIN, ARCHER MSA COALITION: Well, we're not talking about not allowing people to go into court. But when you have cosmic limits, that is no limits on lawsuits, what you're really doing is increasing the number of uninsured, because you are jacking up the cost of health care, which, in turn, jacks up the cost of premiums. And the uninsured is a real problem now.
We've got 45 million uninsured in America, and this is an effort to keep down costs. My sister is an emergency care physician. You know, liability insurance for doctors is about $150,000 a year. You work for eight, 12 years, get your M.D., and then to practice you have to pay this $150,000 entry fee. Something has gotten out of balance.
NEVILLE: So then should you -- so let me ask you this, Dan. So then it be separated, if you will, say, for instance, the so-called bad doctors, the doctors who aren't following proper procedures and making these mistakes? Or just because they are not paying attention or what have you, and then they are the bad apples, if you will?
PERRIN: Well, I mean, if somebody is a chronic error-ridden doctor, obviously the state medical board has a responsibility to all patients to step in and do something. But what we're really talking about is, unless you limit these costs, you are going to increase the number of uninsured. And there are plenty of things that we can do to limit that. This is one of them.
FENN: You know, I'm not sure, however, Arthel, that this would really do much. The biggest problem in the increase in the premiums is that the insurance companies took a bath in the last stock market crash. They put a lot of their money into the stock market and, therefore, lost it. And now they have to raise the premiums on doctors to cover that.
NEVILLE: Yes, but at the end of the day, people at home are looking at this saying, OK, the insurance companies lost money in the stock market. That doctors have to pay exorbitant insurance premiums. But the people are saying, what about the people who are suffering from mistakes?
FENN: Right. And I think this is the problem: If you have someone like Linda McDougal from Wisconsin, who had a double mastectomy on her and they switched the slides...
NEVILLE: What kind of money can pay for that? Nothing, quite frankly.
FENN: No, nothing. I mean she's having operation after operation. It's just terribly hard on her family.
I mean, I would say that judges, that juries should have reasonable standards for amounts of money out there. But to blame this on some of these victims, I think is a terrible mistake.
PERRIN: Nobody is blaming the victim here. What we're talking about is getting the system back into balance so we have reasonable limits on some of these lawsuits because, you know, the unspoken victim in this is the uninsured. And the uninsured are growing in this country and...
NEVILLE: And that's unfortunate.
PERRIN: ... guess what? Everybody pays for it. If you have insurance, you are paying for the uninsured. And...
FENN: I would agree with Dan. I think Dan makes a very good point. I mean I think the uninsured is something we have to be very concerned about here. It's growing, unfortunately, under this administration. But, you know, what we're looking at here are ways to end nuisance lawsuits and lawsuits which shouldn't be brought in the first place.
And that is critical. But let's not penalize true victims with an arbitrary cap of $250,000.
NEVILLE: Oh, man, you guys both make great points. And it's obviously a difficult issue. I want to hear from everyone at home on this one as well. Should there be a cap on medical malpractice awards? It's the "Question of the Day."
You can give me a call at 1-800-310-4CNN, or you can e-mail me at talkback@cnn.com. I'll take your calls and letters later in the hour. Don't go anywhere. The TALK continues after this break.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. We want to share some statistics with you right now. Talking about the median malpractice jury awards, in 1994, that was $362,500. And if you can see there, by the year 2000, that had jumped to $1 million.
Going back to Peter Fenn and Dan Perrin now. Peter, you know maybe is it that the juries are being too generous? Is that possible?
FENN: Well, I think you probably have some large verdicts that are skewing that possibly. I don't have any argument with bringing some of these jury verdicts down. I don't have any argument with curbing some of the costs for lawyers. I think that makes some sense. But, you know, I think one of the problems when you have an arbitrary cap like $250,000 is that for true victims like Linda McDougal, like the family of Jesica who just died with those transplants, you know, that doesn't cut it. It just doesn't make it. So I think that maybe there will be some compromising out of this. But at this point, I think it's a non- starter, when you come at it with $250,000.
PERRIN: Look, I mean, the question is, do you want to have doctors who are enjoying their profession and who can reasonably be expected to do well at what they are doing? And right now with these malpractice insurance rates, they are getting hammered. And that's why doctors are taking these extreme actions like striking.
When is the last time you heard about doctors striking in America? They are really very concerned. And, you know, when you talk about increasing the cost of health care, Ford Motor Company just came out with their plan.
NEVILLE: All right, Peter, Dan, sorry. The music is starting, which means I have to cut you off. But you did make your point; I let you do that.
Thank you, Dan Perrin, so much for being here, as well as Mr. Peter Fenn.
PERRIN: Thanks.
NEVILLE: Do appreciate your both joining us here on TALKBACK LIVE today.
FENN: Thanks.
NEVILLE: OK. And coming up next, we're going to get to the "Question of the Day." Should there be a cap on medical malpractice awards, is the "Question of the Day," as I said. Go ahead and give me a call right now: 1-800-310-4CNN, or you can e-mail me at talkback@cnn.com, and I'll take your calls, e-mails, and talk to audience members like T.J. (ph), when we come back.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: OK. The "Question of the Day": Should there be a cap on medical malpractice awards? Going to go to Connecticut now, where Stanley (ph) is standing by. Your answer, sir.
STANLEY: Hi, Arthel. Listen, I am vehemently opposed to any caps. My father was a victim of medical malpractice three years ago, not by a doctor but by a nurse. He was elderly and he had no economic value based on what the insurance company said. You know the doctors don't realize they are being strung along by their noses...
NEVILLE: Stanley (ph), I'm sorry. What's your answer, sir?
STANLEY: The bottom line is they should have an investigation into what the insurance companies are doing and not picking on the patient.
NEVILLE: So no caps, right?
STANLEY: Absolutely no caps.
NEVILLE: OK, Stanley (ph). Thank you.
T.J.: I don't believe that there should be a cap, because I believe that people are going to need money for a living for the rest of their life and they need to have some sort of support, and that would give it to them.
NEVILLE: Thank you very much, T.J. (ph).
I'm Arthel Neville. I'll see you again tomorrow at 3:00 Eastern, 12:00 Pacific, with more TALKBACK LIVE. Don't go anywhere, because Judy Woodruff is next with "INSIDE POLITICS."
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Preparing to Respond to North Korean MiG Incident by Official Protest>
|
