Burnt Orange Report

Byron --

Could we put up a little something about what the fundraising rules are for proposition advocacy? In most states there are no contribution limits for ballot initiatives and propositions; heck, this is Texas, do we have any limits on anything or anyone?

This worries me -- we're going to get outspent - neigh - utterly snowed under - by the pro-prop 12 people if my suspicion is correct.

That is going to make mobilizing the voters through traditional grass roots methods very important!

Just my $0.02.

Shouldn't that be "Trial Lawyers Against Prop 12"?

Jim - I don't know what the contribution limits are for ballot iniciatives and props. Go ahead and post something about it if you want.

Mark - No, it should be "Everyone Against Prop 12". If you or your family member suffered paralysis from an operation because the surgeon wasn't paying attention, would $250,000 satisfy you for the rest of your life? You may get compensated for your future lost wages, but what if happened to your retired grandmother? According to Prop. 12, her life isn't worth as much money because she doesn't have any "economic value".
Plus, if it's going to cost a company say, $20 million, to improve the safety of their product, wouldn't it be cheaper to leave the dangerous product as is and simply pay out the $250K as the judgments come in? Trial lawyers would loose money on this, yes. But the real losers would be injured Texans.

Years ago neighborhood standards(ie, tar and feathering) prevented attorneys and juries from making the outlandish awards that you see today. Frontier justice is no longer tolerated but that and a more clear divide between right and wrong thwarted such abuse of our legal system as seen today.
It is a shame that we now need to sacrifice personal freedom for the many because of these few unscrupulous attorneys who have created this lottery mentality and are able to hide so easily behind our laws created to protect our freedom. With no societal mechanism which holds back the greed of these few (How much was Jamail's cut of the tobacco lottery er uh I mean lawsuit) I see no other way. Talk about cost, it is now costing us all.

I wanted to know why you are against proposition 12?
I personally know what will come of voting against this proposition, not only have doctors all across the state of Texas packed up their stuff and looked for work in other states, but in Tarrant county alone we lost several hundred doctors this year to malpractice suits being much more than necessary. So you go ahead and vote no to prop. 12 and you may have your rights, but where will you find a doctor to treat you? They are all going to leave! You might try Arkansas!!!

SO WHAT IS THE ANSWER TO PROP 12?
VOTE FOR IT,AND YOUR CHILD INJURED IN A CAR WRECK
WILL NOT BE AWARDED ECONOMIC DAMAGES.
VOTE AGAINST IT, AND YOU MAY HAVE A HARD TIME FINDING A DOCTOR TO TREAT YOUR CHILD.
THE ANSWER IS THROUGH THE BUMS THAT WROTE THIS
PROPOSITION OUT OF OFFICE.
ELECT NEW BUMS THAT WILL WRITE A BILL THAT WILL
BENEFIT EVERYONE.

I vote NO for PROP 12 and it is because I see tragic circumstances daily and until it happens to the ones that will vote yes they will never understand. Instead of signs that say Vote YES...Safe the DOCTORS...it should say VOTE NO AND SAFE YOURSELVES! When you have a child wheel chair bound or someone that is going to be 100% dependent because of a product or accident...$250 is not going to get them through a few months of treatment much less the rest of their lives!

GAO Report Confirms Caps like Prop 12 Have Dropped Malpractice Rates in Other States

Prop 12 will place a limit or cap on non-economic (pain and suffering) damages.

GAO recently released (August 2003) a report to Congress titled “Medical Malpractice- Implications of Rising Premiums on Access to Health Care.” The GAO performed several studies and analyses. Some of the analyses included Texas and other studies did not.

Have caps on pain and suffering lowered the growth of malpractice premiums in the past?
GAO report: Yes (GAO-03-702, “Medical Malpractice- Implications of Rising Premiums on Access to Health Care,” p. 30).

Are medical malpractice claims the greatest contributor to increased premiums?
GAO report: Yes (GAO-03-702, p. 9).

What Texas included in the study about the causes of increased premiums?
Yes (GAO-03-702, p. 9 footnote 14).

Will caps lower the price of malpractice premiums in the long run?
GAO and Congressional Budget Office (CBO): Yes, a federal cap will drive down the long-term price of malpractice premiums (GAO-03-702, p. 34). Passing a cap in Texas will hopefully add momentum to legislation for a federal cap.

Are doctors practicing defensive medicine (i.e. ordering more tests in fear of missing something and being sued)?
GAO report: Yes (GAO-03-702, p. 26).

How much does defensive medicine drive up medical costs?
GAO report: Unknown, not enough data (GAO-03-702, p. 26).

Other than defensive medicine, what other malpractice related issues are driving up medical costs?
GAO report: GAO confirmed that some hospitals are paying for all or part of their physicians’ high premiums in order to maintain access to care. GAO also confirmed that some physicians and nursing homes are continuing to give access without malpractice insurance (GAO-03-702, p. 25).

Did this GAO report directly address healthcare access in Texas?
No.

Is there a lack of access to care due to malpractice premiums in Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, and West Virginia?

GAO report: Debatable. In the few localized instances and often in rural areas in Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, and West Virginia that received much media coverage, GAO confirmed that certain events (such as ER closure in Nevada and patients in Mississippi having to drive 65 miles to deliver because OBs closed their rural practices) were in fact due to high premiums.

“We [GAO] confirmed instances where physician actions in response to malpractice pressures have resulted in decreased access to services affecting emergency surgery and newborn deliveries in scattered, often rural areas of the five states. However, we [GAO] also determined that many of the reported physician actions and hospital-based service reductions were not substantiated or did not widely affect access to health” (GAO-03-702, p. 12).

In other words, GAO claimed that statewide problems with access to health care due to high premiums in the five states studied did not exist. AMA contested the GAO claim (GAO-03-702, p. 38). Many opponents of Prop 12 are misusing the above GAO statement to claim that a national healthcare crisis does not exist. This GAO report did not investigate access to health care on the national level. GAO has yet to determine if there is a national healthcare access problem due to high premiums, and GAO will continue to monitor the problem for Congress.

Are doctors leaving these five states (Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, and West Virginia) because of the high premiums?
GAO report: A few have left, but there is no great exodus of doctors from these states (GAO-03-702, p. 16).

Are doctors choosing to limit high-risk services in the above five states?

GAO report: Further, the GAO found that physicians were not limiting higher-risk services such as mammogram and spinal on state-wide levels. (GAO-03-702, p. 12).

The confirmed instances of limited access to care are few, but they maybe implications of a greater problem for the underserved. One implication is that rising premiums could lead to a lack of access of health care for the underserved (Mississippi example). Another implication is that these few incidents are random and that they indicate nothing. For the GAO’s complete analysis, please refer to pages 12 to 18 under the subheading “Implications of Rising Malpractice Premiums on Access to Health Care.”

If access to health care for the poor is not a problem in Texas, do we wait until premiums get so high that we do have problems with access to health care for our less fortunate? Vote Yes for Prop 12 and reduce the malpractice premiums.

Kurt Reyes
Medical Student
UT Health Science Center at San Antonio

Source: GAO-03-702, “Medical Malpractice- Implications of Rising Premiums on Access to Health Care,” August 2003 accessed 7 September 2003 at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03836.pdf.

Everyone keeps saying that childrend dont' receive lost wages with Prop 12. That's not true. Heres' the law:

"-For an infant or child, lost wages most often are calculated on the life expectancy of a healthy individual at the minimum wage with likely increases, plus benefits such as health and life insurance, sick leave, and retirement income. An alternative, more complicated calculation takes into consideration the parents' ages, education, income, and what they do for a living."

"-For an older child with demonstrated academic and/or athletic achievement, lost wages may be calculated at a higher expected income."

(http://www.texmed.org/prop12/questions.asp)

If this is incorrect, please let me know. Otherwise I'm for Prop 12.

PLEASE FACTOR IN WITH YOUR DECISION IN VOTING AGAINST PROP 12, THAT JURIES MAY STILL AWARD PUNITIVE DAMAGES ON CASES OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE/MALPRACTICE. WE ARE ALL PAYING THE PRICE OF FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS. MY INSURANCE PREMIUMS HAVE GONE UP EVERY YEAR. PLEASE INFORM YOURSELF BEFORE VOTING AGAINST PROP12.

Everyone keeps talking about the medical aspect of this proposition. It's the "and other actions" which makes me not vote for this. Too broad!