BREAKING NEWS
An agreement in principle has been reached on medical malpractice reform between the doctors and the legislative leaders. Details have yet to be worked out, but the deal includes insurance reform and caps on noneconomic damages.
More in tomorrow's Capitol Fax.
Photo of press conference to announce med-mal agreement.
UPDATE: Here is an audio link to the press conference.
posted by Rich Miller @ 5/25/2005 04:32:00 PM
22 comments
22 Comments...
WARNING: Personally insulting and otherwise inappropriate comments (including all profanity) will be immediately deleted! Threads will be closed after 3 deletions. Try to behave like reasonable adults.Click here to notify the "Comment Posse" about objectionable posts.
How many times do caps have to be declared unconstitutional before legislators get it through their thick heads? Lets move on.
Caps could salvage the worsening malpractice crisis and stop the ongoing exodus of physicians from this state. It's about damn time.
Caps don't work, ask the TX and CA Depts. of Insurance. I'm glad to see, though, that if the high cost of medical maplractice insurance is the issue that the GA is directly addessing this problem, and not being used (again) as a patsy for the Chamber.
The good news is that the MedMal proposal will include insurance reforms which means the hustlers at the Med Society Insurance Co will have some competition and those fact salaries will probabl come down
Caps will do absolutely nothing to end the so called med mal insurance crisis. The insurance companies make millions and now will make more. The doctors ought to be going after their own insurers.
Docs ARE their own insurance company (most of them, anyway,) so that argument doesn't really hold water.
And most hospitals (including all the big ones in Chicago) are self-insured -- they too are their own insurance company.
Stop with the "ongoing exodus of physicians" bs. It's not happening, despite what you're being told in S. IL. And now on WBBM "Land of Lawsuits" spot. Shameless.
Until good doctors stand up for themselves and stop subsidizing insurance premiums for bad doctors, there will be no "reform" at all.
If I file too many claims on my auto insurance, I get dropped and your rates aren't affected. Why can't malpractice insurance premiums take this approach? Smaller pool of insured, yes, but fewer claims too. Plus, insurance companies make their profits investing. We all pay higher premiums when they make poor investments.
The insurance industry is making money on both sides of the debate. It's about time they were called out.
It's too bad the bill isn't severable, because there are some good insurance and patient reforms in there that would benefit the public.
Unfortunately, caps are still special legislation and should be declared unconstitutional.
We'll see if the Governor has the "testicular virility" to stand up to the med society, chamber of commerce, hospital association and insurance companies, or if that was just talk.
How about a little professional accountability from the IFDPR for the docs instead of letting those few bad apples spoil the barrel? If a doctor is caught consistently showing up drunk to work or caught selling scripts of controlled substances they should have their licenses yanked! (Those are just two of many expamples from past audits of the IFDPR, formerly the IDPR.) In Illinois, apparently, that not cause for serious discipline.
If the IDPR failed audit after audit why did the gov heap more responsibility on them with the "F" component of their name?
Reform the IFDPR as well!
This is as big a waste of time as Chicago Alderman banning cell phones in cars!
Here are the facts:
1) Virginia has the one of the lowest caps on NED (non-economic damages) in the nation. They also pay premiums HIGHER than the national average.
2) California- Once they enacted caps, you would expect that the rates dropped, right? Well, they didn't. It just slowed the rate of growth. So rates there are higher than the national average too!
There is a major problem with the system. It is not just doctors, not just lawyers and not just insurance companies. everyone is to blame, at least a little. Illinois should have taken a page from Indiana (I Know, how could Indiana do anything right). Indiana capped the value of doctor's insurance policies. I think its $500,000. If you want to sue for more than that, you can, but it MUCH harder. It allows for the rare case when such an award IS justified.
But, it doesn't really matter, since it will be ruled unconstitutional.
Why is it important to limit insurance company's profits, but not trial lawyers???
Is there any was I can read the 1995 IL SC opinion on that law?
Finally, I'll note that Wabash General in Mt. Carmel had considered restarting their ability to deliver babies. But they waited until they saw in the 1995 law was upheld.
So at least in ONE county, tort reform is the difference between a 30/40 drive and a 5 min one to have a baby.
Here's the 1997 decision. It's a long one, but it'll give you a good idea of what an uphill battle it will be to get any caps bill past the courts.
A huge deal in the 1997 opinion, which overturned total tort reform (not just med mal), was that people without incomes (housewives, children, retirees, etc) could not collect lost wages - it discriminated against those individuals. This bill creates an income for those below the average weekly wage in Illinois. It eliminates the discrimination.
In the Chicago Sun-Times story today it reported that an agreement was reached by the Governor, Speaker and Senate President, all Democrats.
When the Governor signs this bill and it becomes law the Democrats will be doing somthing that the Rebublicans coudn't do or wouldn't do for their twenty six years of controlling the Governors office.
If I were in the medical community I would be asking the Republican party why they wouldn't pass a bill that would stand up to Illinois Supreme Court scrutiny.
The answer would be, once we get a bill the medical community agrees with then we can't use med malpractice reform as an issue in our political races.
Again under the Democrats, politics has been set aside for good government for the people of Illinois.
The Anon post at 1:03pm is a hoot. The Democrats, especially the Speaker, and the Supreme Court can read election results. The sponsor of the med mal compromise is one Gordon Maag.
Gordon Maag's name is nowhere on the med mal bill as a sponsor.
The fact remains the Democrats came through for the people putting politics aside. The Republicans failed.
Where are they going to put the language? (i.e. what is the bill number)...will it be Holbrook's bill? If anyone can give me a bill number for this compromise, I would truly appreciate it. Thanks.
The bill in all its glory.
I am going to fast because I have bridge game to go to. In the mid 90's the federal govt started paying medical schools to NOT teach doctors.
Lets require all final dispositions of medical cases to be forwarded to IL DPR and require IL DPR to disclose them. Remove the gag order on all Mal practice cases. Has any one thought that maybe no one with a large earning potential really wants to live in Southern, Illinois?
Shalom,
---Leland Milton Goldblatt, Ph.D. ®
Distinguished Professor
http://www.prof.faithweb.com
Fidel Castro claimed he was going to build a statue in honor of former Gov. George Ryan, who was the first American governor to lead a U.S. trade mission to Cuba.
This caps bill was about one thing, and one thing only: self preservation. Southern Democrats looking to save their seats, Madigan looking to save his leadership position, and the Gov looking to win favor in the south (despite pledges he would never sign a bill with caps). When this bill gets passed it will be the beginning of the end for the jury system here in Illinois.
The GOP couldn't get this to pass "muster" because the Supreme Court was 5-2 in favor of the Democrats until Karmeier was elected. The GOP has been pushing this for years but now, as with many other , the Democrats are taking credit for the idea. When did the Democrats ever have a constituency other than the trial lawyers? Now they seem willing to cut deals and curb lawsuit abuse, which has all the writings of a political manuever. I have a gut feeling that Holbrooke, Haine, Clayborne, Beiser and especially Hoffman are all crining on the inside and smiling to look like they are really worried. I give them all my support for actors of the year!
the court that struck down caps was 4-3 Democrats, not 5-2 (it was only 5-2 between 2000 and 2004). and the vote to strike down caps was 5-1. so, yes, a republican voted to strike them down.
Post a Comment
<< Home