HR 3459 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3459
To provide comprehensive reform regarding medical malpractice.
July 31, 2009
Mr. BAIRD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL
Trial Lawyers To Congress: No Tort Reform For You!
ReplyDeleteIf the most important aspect to us is caps and since the 1975 MICRA amount is adjusted for inflation to over $850,000, we have achieved nothing in this regard and it will have no impact on our premiums or the number of lawsuits.
ReplyDeleteWhores sign certificates of merit. Certificates of merit have had no real impact on the number of frivolous law suits, given the percent that are either dismissed or get a defense verdict.
Once again, portions if not all of this bill are of questionable constitutionality. The bill seems to claim powers belonging to the states. This should prove interesting.
ReplyDeletea trusted colleague informs us:
ReplyDeleteduring the energy & commerce committee debate over hr 3200, rep. burgess offered an amendment to create a $250k non-economic damages cap. it was defeated.
we (physicians) should ask interested congresspeople to convey support for meaningful caps to rep waxman, chair of energy & commerce committee, and rep. rangel, chair of ways and means, as well as leadership of the house.
This just in - Russ Feingold: No Bill before Christmas.
ReplyDeletefrom your link:
ReplyDelete"In reality, Feingold’s assessment may be as disingenous as his misleading assurances that ObamaCare would not fund abortions."
but lets's stay on topic please, hr3459
Fine ... however, without movement on the Republican side, it seems reform is headed for stalemate. Here's a thought, though, from THCB:
ReplyDelete"... None of the Democratic bills that have made it through committee even mention it. There won’t be any compromise between Democrats and Republicans over the old arguments about whether or not we need to cap damages. But the thinking over malpractice has evolved greatly in recent years—health courts, for example, designed to quickly resolve medical injury claims and promote medical error reporting toward improved quality.
In candidate Obama’s health care plan document he called for “promot[ing] new models for addressing physician errors that improve patient safety.” Sounds like health courts to me. Republicans should call him out on it by putting it in their offer!"
http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2009/08/there-will-not-be-health-care-reform-in-2009.html
Was there any insight provided as to why they are establishing a cap of $250,000 in 1975 dollars? It just seems very misleading. Perhaps they should amend this and establish a cap of $250,000 in Monopoly(tm) money. Then at least it would be clear that they aren't taking this issue seriously.
ReplyDeleteFrom Dr. McGinley:
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately the proposed bill is a farce and we need him to understand why.
HR 3459
Title I Sec 101 Cap on Non-Economic damages
Referenced from 1975 $250,000 in 2005 is $878,000. This is not a cap but a goal for the plaintiff lawyers. Most suits resolve around $1,000,000 now. That would leave $122,000 for economic damages. I hope the intentions were good but the numbers do not work.
Title IV Insurance Reform
This charges the malpractice carriers in the state to estimate the savings as a result of Sec 101 and decrease premiums appropriately. In truth there will be no savings and with a higher target for non-economic damages the premiums will be higher.
Title I Sec 102 Sanctions for Meritless Actions and Pleadings
If I read this correctly actions must not be meant to harass, must be legally supported, and have evidentary support and signed by an attorney or party bringing the action.
If not supported by current law, new law or adequate evidence to change a law the signing attorney will be held in contempt
Violation #1 court costs and attorney fees
Violation #2 above and a fine
Violation #3 above and disciplinary hearing with the State Bar
Is there precedence to demonstrate a claim or action as unlawful? Is this nice but will have no teeth?
Title I Sec 103 Performance Standards Applicable to State Medical Boards
Charge the State Medical Boards (SMB) to create a program to process pt complaints in a limited time and provide pt ability to track complaint.
SMB to provide Public with
MD education and training
MD Specialty
Med Mal claims paid
Hospital disciplinary action
Criminal convictions
State medical board actions
all over last 10 years
Optionally they may give business address, Insurance info, Hospital affiliations and awards.
Continued, from Dr. McGinley:
ReplyDeleteIs this information currently publically available on the physicians databank?
If we are giving up so much what are we getting in return?
Title I Sec 104 Interstate Reporting and Physician Tracking Database
SMB submit above info from Sec 103 to a national databank
Also patient complaints may be placed submitted directly from patients without screening and with patient confidentiality to the national databank.
Are patients liable for defamation of character if the submit false accusations in there complaints or if they do not like a physician can they just let loose on a governmentally sponsored, publically accessible data bank?
Title II Health Care Malpractice Liability Sec 201 Mediation Programs
The Rush model for mediation may be the precursor for medical courts. Should we push for Medical courts? Medical litigation can be carved out just as workman's compensation litigation has it's own venue. Section 202 provides grants for training mediators (or Judges)
Title III Voluntary Reporting of Public Safety Incident Sec 921
(e) Confidentiality with respect to identifiable information reported to a patient safety organization
Sec 922 Privelege for patient safety work product
(A) "Privelege" 1) not subject to civil or administative subpeona or order
2) not subject to discovery
(B) "Reporter Protection" - reporter of information for a patient safety work product cannot be adversely acted upon by employer for reporting to a patient safety organization
Sec 923 National Patient Safety Database with all the protections. (This could develop into a Total Joint Replacement Registry and more for each medical specialty)
please read my evaluation and refer to the original copy of the Bill. I believe some good can come from some of the sections in this bill. Unfortunately the creators of the bill either do not understand the finances behind non-economic damage caps or they are hoping we do not read past $250,000.
The amount of information made public in Title I is astounding. The ability of a patient to directly file a complaint on a government sponsored, publically accessible data bank is unacceptable.
We need a seat at the table when Rush Model Mediators are being trained and the system set up.
Finally protection for reporting public safety incidents for the development of better patient safety programs. I hope I did not miss any small print on this one.
AngiesList.Gov - Brilliant!
ReplyDeleteDr scher advises that we've seen much of this bill before
ReplyDeletehttp://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/354/21/2205
and here is what happened to it:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-1784
Howard Dean spills the beans:
ReplyDelete"Asked by an audience member why the legislation does nothing to cap medical malpractice class-action lawsuits against doctors and medical institutions (aka "Tort reform"), Dean responded by saying: “The reason tort reform is not in the [health care] bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everybody else they were taking on. And that’s the plain and simple truth,”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Dean-says-Obamacare-authors-dont-want-to-challenge-trial-lawyers-55140567.html
too bad for them.
ReplyDeletei suspect their courage to take on the lawyers would be well rewarded here.
cr