Voices From Across West Virginia
Provided are a number of letters to the editor that have appeared recently in newspapers across the state. These represent the voices of individual business men and women who are calling on changes to West Virginia's laws and policies regarding business.
The most important race
The Parkersburg News-Sentinel
, May 9, 2004It is amazing to think that there is a political race more important to the future of West Virginia than the state's highest office. The race for Governor is always important, but the outcome this year seems less important than who wins a seat on the West Virginia Supreme Court. Never has a judicial race had or going to have more impact on the future of West Virginian's than when the votes are cast on Tuesday for Supreme Court justice. The winner will be a member of the Supreme Court for the next 12 years.
What is important is that we understand the simple fact that our Supreme Court, as it is currently configured, has a propensity to create laws that otherwise did not exist. They have set precedence that benefits only a very few people, but at the expense of the rest of us who work hard to take car of our families. Why should laymen like me and other citizens be concerned about this?
Well, it's really quite simple, of course it would have to be for me to understand it. It's because of the decisions rendered in the past, West Virginian's have lost enormous opportunities for jobs, pay outrageous insurance premiums and are protected by the worst Workers Compensation Fund in the country.Ask yourself, are you paying too much for insurance, are you concerned about your doctor leaving the area in which you live, are you concerned that the state and city governments are raising taxes to pay for increased insurance cost, are afraid you can be sued for just about anything. If any or all of these issue are important to you, then you should consider the fact that it might be time to change the configuration of the Supreme Court.
On May 11, we the people of West Virginia have an opportunity to cast our votes for change. We can bring back fairness and balance to our judicial system. No longer should failed politicians or jurists be allowed to continue to represent us after developing the track record that exists today. Most of them do not believe we have the courage to vote for such change, but we can send the message loud and clear to all elected officials.
If you really want things to change, then you have to have the courage to vote for it.
Denny Harton
Parkersburg
Dominion Post, May 8, 2004
Every four years residents of the state listen to the gubernatorial candidate's plans to bring jobs to the state. This year the voters actually will have the most impact on the future of the economy of West Virginia.
Among the biggest hurdles in the state for businesses to locate here are the worker's compensation problem and the high level of lawsuits including malpractice cases. The Supreme Court led by Warren McGraw chase away most new physician graduates each year, and has caused many experienced physicians to either leave the state or retire early. In addition, private industry is reluctant to locate in West Virginia in great part due to an activist Supreme Court.
In 2002 the Legislature passed malpractice reform, setting limits on noneconomic damages. The insurance markets, however, will not recognize this reform until it has been tested in the Supreme Court, and the industry is well aware of the tort-friendly McGraw.
There is a candidate that is running against McGraw this year. Jim Rowe understands that the role of Supreme Court judge is to interpret law, not to write new laws. He also understands the need for a reasonable and objective approach to reviewing worker's compensation cases.
It is not every year that voters can have such an impact on the future of the state. A vote for Rowe is a vote for the future of West Virginia.
Mike Sengewalt
Morgantown
Dominion Post, May 7, 2004
As a West Virginian and a physician, I was proud to see our citizens join together to address our medical liability crisis. Last year, the Legislature passed a bill that was critically needed to revive our health-care system.
We at Love Memorial Clinic in Moorefield have been affected by the malpractice crisis in West Virginia. In December 2000, our malpractice insurer went bankrupt and we were to lose our insurance as of Dec. 19, 2000. It was not until Dec. 18, 2000, that we were informed by the state we would be covered, but only for one month.
That process was repeated and we were not informed until Jan. 18, 2001 that we could continue to see patients on Jan. 19, 2001.
Twice we were within a day of no longer being able to treat patients due to our inability to obtain malpractice insurance. Since then, our coverage has gone from $14,000 per year in 2000, to $17,000 in 2001, to $34,000 in 2002, and to $62,000 in 2003.
We were forced to reduce some services in 2003 to keep our premium from increasing again. We are all concerned with physician retention in our state, but few people note the loss of border state physician services. In our small clinic, in our small town, we have experienced three losses of border state physicians.
Despite the Legislature passing needed reforms last year, we are concerned about our ability to not only maintain affordable malpractice insurance, but to maintain malpractice insurance at all at any price. We are also concerned with the loss of physicians -- not just in the large cities, but small towns as well.
I have heard some say there is no medical malpractice crisis in West Virginia. I disagree.
I wish I could say West Virginia will remain a state where quality health care is our No. 1 priority, but the opinion of many in the health-care industry is that these reforms may not last. One decision of the state Supreme Court could cause an immediate relapse into crisis. Despite the good work of our Legislature, West Virginians will continue to face threats to our health-care system until we can improve our courts and show that we value quality health care over meritless lawsuits.
On May 11, if you are voting in the Democratic primary, consider the right choice for health care in our state: Judge Jim Rowe for state Supreme Court. Rowe will bring fairness and impartiality to our highest court, and keep our health-care system intact.
Mike Riggleman, MD
Moorefield
Dominion Post, May 5, 2004
For many years, I have been voting for West Virginians promising to attract new jobs to the state, promising to provide prenatal health to our expecting mothers, promising to improve the public education system for our children and promising to improve t he overall quality of life in the state of West Virginia.
Every year they fall way short of these goals for two simple reasons, lack of resources (funds) and lack of fairness (courts). Contrary to the rhetoric, businesses generate the cash flow from which government draws its resources.
You might imagine my dismay when I read a recent poll conducted by the Institute for Legal Reform that ranked West Virginia 49th as having one of the most egregious legal systems in the country. Why invest in your business in West Virginia, when you are certain the judicial branch of state government will increase your costs of operations and treat you with a bias, and not with the blind trust granted to the courts by our forefathers?
We deserve better and need to find ways to keep businesses and residents here -- not continue to provide reasons to make them want to leave. We need elected officials who will help improve the legal system and judges who are willing to fairly interpret th ose laws. I have lived and worked in West Virginia all my life. I own a construction company that employs dozens. I have worked hard to secure a means of employment for myself, and a sense of security for my employees.
The unemployment rate in West Virginia is around 5.8 percent. Small businesses, like mine, are a key component for economic growth in this state. Small business provides a larger percentage of new jobs and job growth than any other category of industry.
West Virginia has one of the least prosperous populations in the country. We, more than most, need to keep businesses in our state and not force them to relocate due to a burdensome legal system.
One of the biggest obstacles and costs I face is the yearly increase in insurance payments. I attribute the rise in my premiums, in large part, to West Virginia's plaintiff-friendly court system. While I wholly believe that people with legitimate claims should be compensated for negligent products and services, this shouldn't result in creating an undue burden on the rest of our citizens. These claims are not paid with magic money; this increased cost to business is forwarded to the consumer.
The sooner West Virginians force our Legislature to enact policies to correct our uncontrolled civil litigation system, the sooner the playing field will be leveled in our state for start-up businesses to develop and established businesses like mine to stay and expand.
The first course of action is to elect fair and impartial judges, and relieve ourselves of those who create uncertainty on our business by creating laws, rather than use the existing laws to rule from the bench with impartiality.
Manuel Alvarez
MEC Construction Co.
Bridgeport
Why industry isn't thriving in W.Va.
Charleston Daily Mail, May 4, 2004
Why industry isn't thriving in W.Va. I echo Jan Vineyard's "change the court, change the economy" in the Daily Mail on April 29. Now is the time, and the ballot box on May 11 is the place, to address these problems and create a more business-friendly environment if we want our state's economy to turn around.
As interim executive director of the Chemical Industry Committee of the West Virginia Manufacturers Association, I can attest to the difficulties being encountered by the chemical industry of the state.
The last major investments by the industry in the Kanawha Valley were more than 10 years ago. Recent announcements have all been about shutdowns, reductions and downsizings. West Virginia's courts have had a large hand in this.
The state Supreme Court turned back the initial reforms in workers' comp, passed by the Legislature in 1995, and it was the court that created the court-made law referred to as medical monitoring in 1999. These are among the court decisions, together with the overwhelming preference of the current court toward favoring claimants in workers' comp appeals, that have perpetuated a business environment in West Virginia that is driving out and keeping out industrial investment.
In 2003, the Legislature again tackled workers' compensation reform, but elected not to address the over $4 billion debt that has accumulated over time. Legislators were not ducking their responsibilities, but rather were acting rationally, the direct result of an uncertain legal climate.
The Legislature recognized that it needed to wait and see which, if any, of their efforts survive the judicial process before putting business and industry at additional risk.
This uncertain judicial climate leads to an uncertain business climate, which in turn creates risks in West Virginia that do not exist elsewhere. As a result, industrial investors look elsewhere first when they are looking to build or expand.
Tom Dover
Charleston
West Virginia's economy deserves the opportunity for growth, but our judicial situation is making it nearly impossible. We must address these problems now and create a more business-friendly environment if we want our state's economy to survive. As executive director of the West Virginia Oil Marketers & Grocers Association, I hear daily of the problems our entrepreneurs face.
West Virginia's courts are doing their best to help trial lawyers win large awards at the expense of the general population and tax base of our state. Certain judges have added an undue burden onto our state's employers that ultimately results in fewer jobs for our state and higher prices for our customers. And how is our state to pay for its $4 billion in unfunded workers' compensation liabilities?
If the state taxed individuals and businesses what they now spend insuring themselves against liability, it would be necessary to almost double the tax on earned and small-business income.
I don't disagree with justified lawsuits resulting in a more responsible business environment, but with the second-worst legal climate in the country, our courts are becoming a joke. The tort system in West Virginia resembles a lottery more than an efficient system for compensating those injured by the wrongful actions of others. Some people have even referred to our courts as veritable "slot machines."
Modern product-liability litigation drives safe products and services out of business due to the increase in insurance costs, employee costs and price increases. Small businesses go out of business because they cannot afford it. But small business is where most of the employment and job growth comes from.
West Virginia should enact policies to regulate our uncontrolled civil litigation system. When people aren't treated fairly under the law, they leave. And that makes it more expensive for people, like your local grocer or convenience store, to do business here.
I think it's time those taxes went to pay for folks willing to change the legal system instead of abusing it.
Jan Vineyard
Charleston
Lawsuit abuse is costing everyone
Huntington Herald-Dispatch, April 27, 2004
There were many important elements missing from Chad Lovejoy’s guest column that appeared on this page on April 9.
Lovejoy was identified as a lawyer, but he does not note that he’s a personal injury lawyer, a person who makes his money by receiving a portion of the lawsuits that he wins. He also does not mention that his fellow members of West Virginia’s personal injury industry contribute more than four of every five dollars (or 83 percent) of the large contributions raised by the campaign of incumbent state Supreme Court Justice Warren McGraw.This connection is a "dirty little secret" that Lovejoy and his fellow trial lawyers would rather you not know when you go into the voting booth on May 11.
What Lovejoy does accomplish in his column is attack the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce while singing the praises of McGraw.It’s striking that most of the people who are writing letters of support for McGraw and sending him the vast majority of the campaign donations he’s collecting are trial attorneys, who clearly stand to benefit financially from cases heard before the aforementioned court.
If that lack of disclosure wasn’t enough, what disturbs me most is the overused tactic of employing class warfare and a warning of "greedy corporations" as their rallying cry.
Does the lack of fairness within our Supreme Court negatively affect the lives of every West Virginian, including working families? You bet it does.
When our healthcare is threatened and doctors look elsewhere, when major employers won’t consider West Virginia because of our lawsuit-friendly climate and when trial lawyers can win a "No Proof? No problem!" verdict because of medical monitoring even where there’s no actual damages, we’re stuck with a court system that is harming working families.
As to Lovejoy’s dismissal of the "glaring need for civil justice reform," our doctors, businesses and insurance companies are voting with their feet. Already, some insurance companies have decided to no longer write new policies in West Virginia, and West Virginians are finding the cost of their home and car insurance is 20 to 30 percent higher than in neighboring states.
Finally, Lovejoy cites the wish to limit jury awards as harmful, with an example that a person who is injured could not receive medical expenses for life. Lovejoy knows full well that medical liability limits apply only to non-economic damages, and that actual estimated lifetime medical costs are recoverable in full under compensatory damages.
The West Virginia public needs to understand that there is no free lunch, and that every consumer pays for all abuses of the "system." West Virginians pay for their "consumer protection" through high workers’ compensation premiums, loss of jobs and opportunity, rising insurance costs and loss of access to medical care.
It’s time we take a hard look at the five people who sit on the Supreme Court and realize that a three-person majority of justices has more power over our everyday lives that any governor or legislator.
Persons interested in more information on this topic can contact West Virginia Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, a non-profit watchdog group at P.O. Box 127, Charleston, WV 25321 or go to www.wvjustsicewatch.org.
Robert D. Mauk of Huntington is chairman of West Virginia Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse
State 'out of step' with mainstream practices
Dominion
Post,
Our
"out of step" laws and policies are putting my business in jeopardy.
The
major problems confronting our state's business and industry include inflated
workers' compensation costs, a glaring need for civil justice reform,
inordinately cumbersome environmental procedures, third-party bad faith lawsuits
and sky-high business taxes.
We
need to elect public officials to all levels of our state government -- the
Supreme Court, the governor's office, the Legislature, the Board of Public Works
-- who will work to resolve our "out of step" problems and help
restore our great state to place of job growth and economic vitality.
Paul
B. Riedel
President
Riedel-Wilks
Huntington
Judge Rowe will take politics out of court
The Herald-Dispatch, April 22, 2004
I am writing this letter in support of Judge Jim Rowe for state Supreme Court. Jim Rowe does not represent special interest groups, as he is a fair and impartial judge. He is friendly to the business community and is for economic development in this state. He will judicate, not legislate, from the bench. He will not delay voting on important Supreme Court decisions for political purposes.
Gov. Bob Wise fought hard for medical malpractice legislation because he realized physicians were an important part of the community when trying to attract new business to the state.
Unfortunately, Judge Rowe’s Democratic opponent, Justice Warren McGraw, if re-elected to the Supreme Court, will have the swing vote and likely would vote to overturn the medical malpractice legislation that the governor so strongly advocated.
All this is not being favored by the trial lawyers. Physicians need to be retained in this state. A vote for Judge Rowe would further prevent lawsuit abuse and take the politics out of the Supreme Court.
David L. Patick, M.D.
Huntington