This is a lie. Read the bill.

First you claim that I haven't paid attention to what people say publicly and when I demonstrate that I am not the one with that problem, you say that they are lies and change your accusation to not having read the bill. Perhaps I have read it more thoroughly than you, though I doubt that anybody here will have read it in its entirety.

All fraud. I just cited the medicare fraud number because it was stuck in my memory.

So how does the % medicare fraud compare to private insurance fraud in healthcare and elsewhere?

Take it up with the author of the article cited in the Wiki entry you provided. That's who I quoted.

The author you quoted was not commenting on the example I provided.

Again, I'm providing the reasons given in the article cited in the Wiki entry you provided.

Your article makes general comments. If you crash your car and find an article saying that cars can crash because the road is wet, that does not prove that the road was wet when you crashed your car.

The tort reform I advocate starts with legal representative compensation. Currently, lawyers get far too high compensation rates...

That's a bigger fight, but tort reform also requires juries not to award huge awards unless negligence or incompetence causes serious injury. Remove that inventive for frivolous claims and it removes the lawyers from the picture, meaning they can charge whatever they like.

However, there should also be repercussions for bringing frivilous lawsuits which waste the court's time until a settlement is reached, which is the main purpose in the first place.

Some jurisdictions require a (say) 20K deposit to cover at least some of the opponent's costs if your claim fails. This tends to focus the mind. ;-) If it is claimed that it causes a barrier to reasonable claims, perhaps the lawyer working for a % of any eventual award can stump up the cash if they really believe the case has merit.