Insurers stashing record surpluses, still hiking rates

By regulation in all 50 states, insurance companies must keep a certain amount of surplus funds (instead of distributing profits to stockholders). A recent report analyzing plans covering 1 in 3 Americans showed that in many states, insurers are keeping far more surplus funds than required by law, yet are still raising rates by as much as 18%. In many instances, the insurers could be using the surplus funds to minimize rate increases but are not doing so.

The report, from the Consumers Union (the publisher of Consumer Reports), urges state lawmakers and regulators to change insurance laws to either (1) set a maximum surplus amount or (2) permit regulators to take surplus amounts into account when approving or rejecting proposed rate increases.

At a time when most Americans are struggling to pay medical and other bills, insurers are substantially raising rates even though they already have tons of our money in the bank. Should companies who are supposed to be financing our health care be adding to our stress levels by jacking up our bills?

Nathan licensed to practice in nearby rocket docket

I’m now licensed to practice in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (the “District”), which is known for having one of the fastest patent dockets in the country. This venue is also considered to be one of the more pro-patentee locations around, which means that many patent owners choose to bring suit in the District. With this license, I’m now just an hour away from one of America’s favorite patent litigation forums.

One of the reasons the District handles a large patent docket so efficiently are the Local Patent Rules. These Patent Rules set forth a timeline for specific tasks, unique to patent litigation, that must be performed before a patent case can be tried to a jury. Having tried patent cases without the benefit of a schedule that requires an opposing party to act, I know I’ll be asking other courts to adopt these rules in future patent cases not situated in the District.

Doctors aren't reporting dangerous doctors

Here's a link to an AP report on a recent study by a Harvard Medical School doctor which found that "a surprising 17 percent of the doctors surveyed had direct, personal knowledge of an impaired or incompetent physician in their workplaces," but that "[o]ne-third of those doctors had not reported the matter to authorities[.]"

Any person, including a doctor, that engages in dangerous behavior should be held accountable. If, as a profession, doctors won't police themselves in order to keep their patients safe, who are we going to rely upon to do so? The only other mechanism to hold doctors accountable is a medical malpractice lawsuit when a patient is actually harmed due to a doctor's dangerous behavior. It's strange that doctors will usually speak out against trial lawyers, but won't consistently speak out against the dangers lurking within their own profession.

How the patent system could better solve our government's problems

Many citizens view the patent system as a way to protect ideas. This is true in a broad sense, so long as an inventor reduces her ideas to an actual product or process. What many people don’t know is that our patent system in America is designed to discourage inventors from sitting on their patents rather than using them.

This is particularly relevant to today’s public discussions on energy policy. As a country, we’re facing a crisis in the Gulf of Mexico due to BP’s oil spill, our dependence on foreign oil, and our general lack of viable energy alternatives for creating a substantial portion of our energy needs from renewable or carbon-neutral sources.

The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 gives the government certain rights to patented technology maturing out of federally-funded research.  I mentioned this act in the context of a law review article published in 2008 on the viability of Americans growing their own ethanol-based fuel. Two rights reserved to the government are key:  first, if the government funds research at an institution, the government need not pay to use the intellectual property arising from such research. That is, the Bayh-Dole Act allows the government to sidestep the artificial markup for patented products that end consumers have to pay. Second, if the owner of the patented technology is not fully exploiting the technology to the benefit of society, the government may license the technology out to firms who will.

Over 7.5 million patents have been granted by our federal government. To point out a few examples, over 15,000 of these patents deal with transmission of electricity. Over 26,000 relate to wells and drilling for oil. 33,000 represent technological advancement in power plants. Nearly 64,000 address radiant (solar) energy.

The 7.5 million patents represent the collective knowledge of the best and brightest from around the world, and many of those patents were the product of federally-funded research. It seems to me that the federal government could mine some of the technology it has already paid for as a start towards creating new energy policies for our future.