WHEW! Trial Lawyers Won't Be Destitute After Health Care Reform

Stephen Kruiser ^ | 10/30/09 | Stephen Kruiser

[sdkruiser]

Because I know you were worried.

Section 2531 (pp. 1431-1433) of the "Bend Over And Take It, America" bill seems tantalizing at first glance.

IN GENERAL.—To the extent and in the

amounts made available in advance in appropriations

Acts, the Secretary shall make an incentive payment,

in an amount determined by the Secretary, to each

State that has an alternative medical liability law in

compliance with this section.

Hooray! Some medical liability reform at last! With financial incentives to the states who implement it!

Not so fast.

[bergmeid]

So why would any doctor want to continue to practice medicine in this country? What’s the incentive?

[WayneS]

I know I’LL sleep better tonight knowing those poor guys won’t have to be living under any bridges any time soon...

[WayneS]

The incentive APPEARS to be for doctors to become trial lawyers.

[NonValueAdded]

Nice catch. The trial lawyers are the absolute winners in this bill. Cost clamp-down and the elimination of “unnecessary tests” [read defensive medicine] leave the docs as sitting ducks.

[Dick Bachert]

Thank God. I’d been losing sleep over that one.

[DrC]

“the law does not limit attorneys’ fees

or impose caps on damages. (italics mine)”

It probably will surprise no one to learn that of the many approaches tried by different states over the years, caps on non-economic damages have consistently been shown to be effective in reducing malpractice costs. Even the CBO acknowledges this (see Fig. 2 in http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/71xx/doc7174/04-28-MedicalMalpractice.pdf). CBO says such caps could reduce Medicare spending alone by 4% a year

In essence, Pelosi is willing to reward states only if they avoid a tried-and-tested approach to malpractice reform. I’m sure trial lawyers are thrilled at the excellent return on their investments in campaign contributions to the Dems.