Despite a slew of activity urging U.S. senators to end debate on medical liability reform, an effort this past week to bring the Medical Care Access Protection Act of 2006, S. 22, to a floor vote failed to muster the necessary votes.
Vote to End Medical Liability Reform Debate Fails
By Leslie Champlin
5/9/2006
"One of the Academy's strategies in the effort to reform the medical liability system in America was to get a vote on the Senate floor," said AAFP President Larry Fields, M.D., of Ashland, Ky., in an interview shortly after the May 8 vote.
"We wanted our elected representatives to stand up and be counted. Either they were on the side of access to health care for our people, or they were on the side of the trial lawyers. This much has been accomplished," Fields said.
"We now must work through the political process to ensure a more complete success the next time," said Fields. "Our members should take note of how their senators voted." (Read a complete list of senators and how each voted on the May 8 measure to end debate on S. 22.)
The vote came after more than a month of intense AAFP activism on medical liability reform, culminating in an all-member e-mail sent May 8 -- the day of the vote. Numerous Academy members -- many using computers available during the National Conference of Special Constituencies and Annual Leadership Forum in Kansas City, Mo. -- used the AAFP Speak Out Web page to urge their senators to end debate on the issue.
On May 3, several Academy members from Tennessee contacted Senate Majority leader Bill Frist, M.D., R-Tenn., to urge him to move on S. 22. That effort followed an April Speak Out Action Alert and Fields' tour of Capitol Hill, where he met with legislators and their aides to emphasize the impact of high medical liability premiums on patients' access to care.
If it had succeeded, the call to end debate would have allowed the Senate to vote on legislation that would limit medical liability noneconomic damages to $250,000 for any one health care provider, with an additional $250,000 cap on judgments against a single health care institution and $500,000 for all institutions. The total cap for noneconomic damages would be $750,000. The 48 votes to end debate fell short of the 60 needed to bring the measure to the floor.
The bill also would
"We wanted our elected representatives to stand up and be counted. Either they were on the side of access to health care for our people, or they were on the side of the trial lawyers. This much has been accomplished," Fields said.
"We now must work through the political process to ensure a more complete success the next time," said Fields. "Our members should take note of how their senators voted." (Read a complete list of senators and how each voted on the May 8 measure to end debate on S. 22.)
The vote came after more than a month of intense AAFP activism on medical liability reform, culminating in an all-member e-mail sent May 8 -- the day of the vote. Numerous Academy members -- many using computers available during the National Conference of Special Constituencies and Annual Leadership Forum in Kansas City, Mo. -- used the AAFP Speak Out Web page to urge their senators to end debate on the issue.
On May 3, several Academy members from Tennessee contacted Senate Majority leader Bill Frist, M.D., R-Tenn., to urge him to move on S. 22. That effort followed an April Speak Out Action Alert and Fields' tour of Capitol Hill, where he met with legislators and their aides to emphasize the impact of high medical liability premiums on patients' access to care.
If it had succeeded, the call to end debate would have allowed the Senate to vote on legislation that would limit medical liability noneconomic damages to $250,000 for any one health care provider, with an additional $250,000 cap on judgments against a single health care institution and $500,000 for all institutions. The total cap for noneconomic damages would be $750,000. The 48 votes to end debate fell short of the 60 needed to bring the measure to the floor.
The bill also would
- narrow the window of time in which a plaintiff could file a lawsuit to three years from the time a liability-related injury manifested, or to one year from the time the claimant discovered or should have discovered the injury;
- limit attorneys' contingency fees;
- restrict expert witnesses to those who are "appropriately credentialed" in one or more states, who typically provide the type of treatment under review and who are "substantially familiar with the applicable standards of care and practice as they relate to the act or omission which is the subject of the lawsuit"; and
- prohibit expert testimony by one medical specialist or subspecialist against a defendant who practices a different specialty or subspecialty unless it can be determined that the standards of care and practice in the two areas are similar.
Further action on medical liability is unlikely this year, according to Doreen Bell, an AAFP government relations representative.
Pressure for passage of medical liability reform legislation has been building throughout the year, and physicians may see ultimate victory in 2007, said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., who introduced S. 22 on May 3.
"Liability reform, along with a different workforce and payment reform, are the critical components that must be in place if we are ever to achieve health care coverage for all," said Fields. "Our members, patients and elected representatives must understand this key point: our goal is for everyone to have real access to quality, affordable accessible health care. The only realistic way this can ever be done is with a primary care-based health care system made up of a well-trained workforce of family physicians providing personal medical homes to the people of this country.
"That workforce must be free to do the right thing -- and only the right thing -- for each and every patient each and every time without the fear that legitimate medical decisions will drag physicians into a liability system for the next five to 10 years that, at the end of the day, serves only to line the pockets of plaintiffs' attorneys and not protect our patients."
Pressure for passage of medical liability reform legislation has been building throughout the year, and physicians may see ultimate victory in 2007, said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., who introduced S. 22 on May 3.
"Liability reform, along with a different workforce and payment reform, are the critical components that must be in place if we are ever to achieve health care coverage for all," said Fields. "Our members, patients and elected representatives must understand this key point: our goal is for everyone to have real access to quality, affordable accessible health care. The only realistic way this can ever be done is with a primary care-based health care system made up of a well-trained workforce of family physicians providing personal medical homes to the people of this country.
"That workforce must be free to do the right thing -- and only the right thing -- for each and every patient each and every time without the fear that legitimate medical decisions will drag physicians into a liability system for the next five to 10 years that, at the end of the day, serves only to line the pockets of plaintiffs' attorneys and not protect our patients."
Government & Medicine
Revised Sunshine Act Would Override State Laws
Massachusetts Strengthens Primary Care
FP Testimony: Docs Need Help With EHR Costs
HHS Pulls Proposed Rule on HPSAs, MUAs
CMS to Vet AMA/RUC Medical Home Pay Scale
Medicare Physician Scarcity Incentives Expire
Start of DME Bidding Program Delayed
Congress Overrides Bush's Medicare Veto
CMS Starts Processing Claims as Bush Vetoes Medicare Bill
Medicare Bill Passage Averts Pay Cuts
CMS to Temporarily Hold Medicare Claims
Bad News: Medicare Cut Takes Effect July 1
Senate to Take Up Two Medicare Bills
AARP Campaign Could Impact Pay Update
AAFP Recognizes Lawmaker as Health Care Leader
Millions Could Lose Access to Health Care