because of this windfall they will all lower their prices now right???
Posted on 05/13/2005 10:40:07 AM PDT by Ravi
SPRINGFIELD - Two separate bills, both with caps on pain and suffering, moved slowly through the House and Senate on Thursday as Illinois lawmakers continue to heatedly debate the contentious issue of medical malpractice legislation.
The House bill calls for a limit of $250,000 on non-economic damage awards against a physician and a $500,000 limit on awards against hospitals. The Senate bill sets caps at $500,000 for physicians and $1 million on hospitals.
State Sen. Dave Luechtefeld, R-Okawville, has
said throughout the current legislative session that legislators must approve "meaningful" medical malpractice legislation. He said the House version of the bill is just that.
"I'm happy that things are moving in the direction that they are," Luechtefeld said. "There is a very meaningful package on the House floor right now, but the question is where does it go from here. Hopefully, the leaders mean what they are saying and they will allow this bill to be called for a vote."
(Excerpt) Read more at southernillinoisan.com ...
I mentioned Hell freezing over yesterday. Well indeed, hell may be freezing over. I'll wait and see.
There are no neurosurgeons left south of Springfield. Southern Illinois no longer has a functioning trauma or obstetrical sysytem.
because of this windfall they will all lower their prices now right???
People like what’s-his-name, Hanoi John’s running mate – won’t like such things.
Windfall? Not sure what you mean.
Also I decide my prices? There's a small thing called Medicare/Medicaid and other third party insurers that decide what I get paid. I can charge a million bucks for you to see me; I'm only going to get paid what Medicare decides they want to reimburse me.
i meant that if the astronomically high priced medical malpractice insurance is reduced(or maybe i'm reading too much into what the bill will accomplish) it should eventually show up in the bills/amount charged, since that's what i've been led to believe is part of the reason medical bills are so high is the high cost of medical malpractice insurance. believe me, i'm all for it... too many times doctors are caught in a no win situation and everybody wanna get paid... everybody wanna hit the medical lottery / jackopt
I look at it this way. It's more than what you pay at the doctor's office. It's about whether there will even be a doctor available to see you. That in IMO is more important.
If I or another physician feel comfortable practicing in an area of the country perhaps because of tort reform, then my services are available to you. Keep this in mind when you or a family member needs Neurosurgical or Obstetrical services. These are the two hardest hit areas. If there are no Neurosurgeons or OB's around where you live, and you or a family member need their services, then your chances for a medically successful outcome are significantly diminished. Keep that in mind.
Someone earlier mentioned there are no Neurosurgeons south of Springfield. That's a ticking time bomb and I'm sure patients with head injuries or other neurosurgical emergencies who had to be taken to Chicago or St. Louis or elsewhere have not had the best outcomes. There's a golden hour rule in Neurosurgery - if you can operate in an hour's time, then your chances for survival and no neurological impairment increase greatly. If it's longer than that, then well, I wish you luck and prayers.
"But perhaps the strongest indictment of tort “reform” came from the nation’s largest medical malpractice insurer, GE Medical Protective. Last year, it admitted that damages caps will not lower physicians’ premiums. The company has pushed for higher physician premiums in states that have caps, seeking a 29.2 percent rate hike in California and a 19 percent rate hike in Texas."
"According to the Chicago Tribune, “[Illinois] state figures indicate that there has been a steady increase in the number of doctors licensed by the state in recent years —even in high-risk specialty fields in which doctors reportedly were leaving Illinois in search of lower insurance premiums.” If this is so, any problem with health care access in an isolated area must be a result of factors unrelated to malpractice insurance or jury verdicts."
...and so on. The tort-reformers have no reliable statistics that support their arguments. Their "crisis" campaign has been based on emotionally charged anecdotal evidence.
Every single insurer has lowered their rates in Texas since passage of the proposition dealing with malpractice caps except perhaps GE. They will end up losing business that way.
There should be a cap on how much of the payment lawyers can get too.
"The American Medical Association (AMA) has claimed a litigation explosion has caused a crisis in medical malpractice. Texas is one of the AMA's crisis states. The three biggest insurers in the state have increased rates by an average of 135% over the last five years (1999-2003). However, data from the Texas Department of Insurance shows that the number of claims, the value of claims, and the rate of claims per physician have all remained constant or declined over the last decade."
http://www.texaswatch.org/documents/Stability%20Not%20Crisis%20Study%20Summary.pdf
Again, you're combining apples and oranges. You realize that insurers have to set aside a pool of money as reserves in case they get hit with the big one. See Massachusetts where there was a verdict for 24 million. So in order to accumulate these reserves for future payouts, our premiums went up markedly in Texas during that time (1999 - 2003). I was a resident in training in Texas then so I was full aware of these increases. So even though current claims and payouts were stable at that time, the insurers were collecting increasing premiums to keep their reserves up. Otherwise their bond rating falls and they sometimes are not able to issue anymore policies for fear of default. Thank the lawyers for this.
So what happened in September of 2003 in Texas. Proposition 12 was passed as a constitutional amendment (read the judiciary cannot mess with this law) which capped non-economic damages per claimant at $250,000 for physicians and $250,000 for hospitals in addition. This was then put forth to the voters who approved it and it is now in the Texas constitution. No lawyer or judge could overturn it since we know that never happens.
Then what happened. TMLT, the largest insurer of physicians in Texas reduced their rates 12% immediately and another 8% in 2004. Similarly, the Doctor's Company, the 2nd biggest insurer in TX, also reduced their rates. And guess what, insurers that had left the state came back in. I'm not sure how many but several did. And we all know what competition does to prices.
So choose to believe what you want, cite this study or that study but the facts speak for themselves. Physicians are paying less in premiums, more physicians are practicing all across Texas, rural and urban counties without OB's and Neurosurgeons have them again and well trial lawyers are miffed. That's all gotta be a good thing. Have a good nite.
Again, you're combining apples and oranges. You realize that insurers have to set aside a pool of money as reserves in case they get hit with the big one. See Massachusetts where there was a verdict for 24 million. So in order to accumulate these reserves for future payouts, our premiums went up markedly in Texas during that time (1999 - 2003). I was a resident in training in Texas then so I was full aware of these increases. So even though current claims and payouts were stable at that time, the insurers were collecting increasing premiums to keep their reserves up. Otherwise their bond rating falls and they sometimes are not able to issue anymore policies for fear of default. Thank the lawyers for this.
So what happened in September of 2003 in Texas. Proposition 12 was passed as a constitutional amendment (read the judiciary cannot mess with this law) which capped non-economic damages per claimant at $250,000 for physicians and $250,000 for hospitals in addition. This was then put forth to the voters who approved it and it is now in the Texas constitution. No lawyer or judge could overturn it since we know that never happens.
Then what happened. TMLT, the largest insurer of physicians in Texas reduced their rates 12% immediately and another 8% in 2004. Similarly, the Doctor's Company, the 2nd biggest insurer in TX, also reduced their rates. And guess what, insurers that had left the state came back in. I'm not sure how many but several did. And we all know what competition does to prices.
So choose to believe what you want, cite this study or that study but the facts speak for themselves. Physicians are paying less in premiums, more physicians are practicing all across Texas, rural and urban counties without OB's and Neurosurgeons have them again and well trial lawyers are miffed. That's all gotta be a good thing. Have a good nite.
Meanwhile, more victims of medical negligence are uncompensated for their losses.
Pure unadulterated BS. This type of legislation has nothing to do with the numbers of "victims" (speaking of emotionally charged terms) but rather the maximum compensation per client. More importantly, it, by association, limits the amount of money you lawyers rake in.
Malpractice legislation was one of Bush's priorities. What has happened with it?
Legislation like that requires 60 votes to pass in the Senate. Let's just say we're not even close to that threshold now. There's probably 52 or 53 senators who would vote for limits. Notable republicans against caps include Lindsey Graham and Michael Crapo. It's not going to go anywhere in the U.S. senate so it's up to individual states to get it right which they are slowly doing.
It is true that putting a cap on payouts reduces the potential income of lawyers. But it has the more important effect of discouraging lawyers from taking victims' cases.
Med-mal cases are very expensive to pursue and very risky since most juries inherently favor Doctors. None of the so-called "med-mal crisis" reform makes it any cheaper for victims to seek compensation.
So by simple economics, med-mal simply reduces the victims access to legal representation without doing anything to actually reduce the occurance of medical negligence.
(One exception is Florida, where they a have strikes rule for the Docs)
One problem is in the congress and senate 75% of the people are lawyers themseleves.
Which they are sworn emissaries of the court. And thus it should be a major seperation of powers issue. It also is why they never challenge the judges.
Tom Delay is the only guy I have seen speaking out against the judges, and not surprisingly he is one of the few non-lawyers in congress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.