|
What Opponents are Saying
about Proposition 12:
|
|
What Proponents are Saying
about Proposition 12:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Placing a cap on non-economic damages will only benefit HMO’s and insurance companies.
|
|
HMOs don’t benefit from the cap. What’s more, medical liability insurers lost money in Texas four of the past five years; taking one-third of a billion in losses during the past three years alone. Thirteen of the 17 companies that wrote medical liability policies in Texas just a few years ago have stopped doing business in the state. This has left an estimated 6,500 Texas doctors scrambling to find insurance coverage. Placing a cap on non-economic damages will ensure lower insurance premiums for doctors and hospitals, reasonable compensation for injured patients and greater access to healthcare for all of us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implementing limits on non-economic damages violates the state constitution by taking power away from judges and juries.
|
|
Setting damage caps in healthcare lawsuits is not a new or novel idea. Courts and Legislatures have always placed boundaries around trials. Texas is just the latest to screen and rein in oversized awards. Should voters approve Proposition 12, Texas judges and juries will continue to render decisions in healthcare lawsuits. However, courts will no longer be able to render unlimited awards for subjective harm. This is the law of the land in 22 other states. In many states, damage caps have been challenged in the courts and found constitutional. Texas trial lawyers are dredging up many of the same arguments that failed elsewhere in an attempt to defeat Proposition 12. In the highest state courts across America, the trial lawyers have challenged the constitutionality of the caps on a host of factors and the constitutionality of the caps has prevailed. Voter approval of Proposition 12 will hasten the implementation and societal benefits of the cap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Placing limits will not curb frivolous lawsuits.
|
|
Placing limits on non-economic damages is not intended to address frivolous lawsuits. It is intended to address oversized awards. House bill 4, the omnibus civil justice reform bill, addressed frivolous lawsuits. This amendment will hold down the cost of medical liability insurance, which will allow more doctors to remain in practice and provide affordable medical care to those who need it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Placing a cap on non-economic damages distastefully puts a dollar value on human life; insinuating that a stay-at-home mom or elder individual is worth less than the life of a doctor or lawyer.
|
|
Civil courts assess money damages as a means of compensating loss. However, no amount of money can replace a limb or the loss of a loved one. Money—in any amount—is inadequate to cover the emotional loss. Let’s not pretend that it will. Be assured, the Texas cap will not lessen the ability of a teenager, homemaker or senior citizen to recover past and future economic loss. Even with a cap in place, any plaintiff can recover a substantial sum for lost future earnings, in addition to all medical bills, punitive damages, and, in some cases, attorney’s fees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A one-size-fits-all cap isn’t fair to those victimized by the worst possible examples of medical malpractice.
|
|
Non-economic awards, by their nature, are arbitrary and subjective. The $750,000 cap for multiple defendants provides a safety net to compensate the most disastrous of situations. This is a compromise with which Texans can live, literally.
Remember, the cap applies only to non-economic damages often awarded for emotional pain and suffering. Injured patients will still receive all of their economic damages for past and future lost wages, medical bills, custodial care, and prejudgment interest. Even with a cap in place, those negligently harmed still can collect multi-million dollar judgments. where justified. In cases of extreme negligence, victims can receive punitive damages, as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HMO lobbyists are trying to sneak an early vote past voters rather than hold the election in November during the regular election date.
|
|
Immediate relief is needed to stop doctors from leaving the state or limiting their practice. September 13 is the earliest possible date that a statewide election could have been scheduled. In fact, the September election would have occurred whether the lawsuit limitation cap was on the ballot or not. Proposition 12 is only one of 22 proposed amendments on the September constitutional ballot. Patients are best served if we fix our healthcare woes now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HMO’s and insurers would have voters pass this immunity amendment having failed to show that judges or juries are unwilling or unable to render reasonable awards.
|
|
Non-economic award—for such subjective harm as pain and suffering and loss of companionship—have quadrupled in the past 10 years thanks to excessive jury awards. Non-economic awards used to account for a small portion of malpractice verdicts. Today, awards for hard-to-quantify non-economic awards are the biggest component in malpractice verdicts and are far and away the driving force behind skyrocketing liability premiums for doctors and hospitals. Multi-million dollar subjective awards against doctors are harming patients because doctors have been forced to restrict their practice due to huge increases in the cost of medical liability insurance. This amendment will hold down the cost of liability insurance, which will allow more doctors to remain in practice and provide medical care to those who need it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This special election stands to cost Texans up to $10 million. That’s money that could be better spent funding schools and children’s health.
|
|
Budgeting is about using scare funds in a prudent and priority manner. But the fact is, the September election would have occurred whether the lawsuit limitation cap was on the ballot or not. Proposition 12 is only one of 22 proposed amendments on the September 13 constitutional ballot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any true reform would strengthen rather than weaken our consumer protections. This amendment is nothing more than an overreacting and unnecessary free pass for those who commit malpractice mayhem.
|
|
What could protect the consumer more than affordable health care and insurance premiums? The public deserves good medicine, as few medical errors as humanly possible and a legal system that protects their rights and fairly reimburses their losses. This amendment, coupled with the recent strengthening of the State Board of Medical Examiners provides patients such protections. Proposition 12 will hold down the cost of liability insurance, which will allow more doctors to remain in practice. Also, it will allow more patients to get the care they need. A doctor or hospital must carry a prescribed amount of liability insurance to get protection from the cap. The minimum level of prescribed coverage will double over the next four years, meaning more dollars will be available to a patient harmed due to medical negligence. In addition, Texas lawmakers recently increased the authority of the State Board of Medical Examiners, giving it substantially more money and staff with which to investigate and punish bad practice.. A concerted effort has been made to prevent medical errors and to reasonably compensate those who are harmed due to medical negligence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As long as we’re going to cap non-economic damages, there ought to be some guarantee of an insurance rate rollback.
|
|
Doctors, hospitals and nursing homes are paying exorbitant liability rates, while medical liability insurers continue to lose more than a $100 million a year in the Texas market. The first need is to stop the bleeding and stabilize the market. Medical costs will not stabilize nor will significant rate relief occur until the damage caps are ruled constitutional. Voter approval of Proposition 12 will settle the matter once and for all, and accelerate rate reductions for doctors, patients and hospitals.
|
