The American Medical Association has long battled Democrats who oppose protecting doctors from malpractice lawsuits. But during a private meeting at the White House last month, association officials said, they found one Democrat willing to entertain the idea: President Obama.
In closed-door talks, Mr. Obama has been making the case that reducing malpractice lawsuits ”” a goal of many doctors and Republicans ”” can help drive down health care costs, and should be considered as part of any health care overhaul, according to lawmakers of both parties, as well as A.M.A. officials.
It is a position that could hurt Mr. Obama with the left wing of his party and with trial lawyers who are major donors to Democratic campaigns. But one Democrat close to the president said Mr. Obama, who wants health legislation to have broad support, views addressing medical liability issues as a “credibility builder” ”” in effect, a bargaining chip that might keep doctors and, more important, Republicans, at the negotiating table.
[blockquote] But to deliver a deal with doctors, Mr. Obama would probably have to defy senior members of his party in both houses of Congress. Many Democrats oppose putting limits on medical lawsuits because they believe it is ineffective and unfair to patients.[/blockquote]
It is very effective, in that it increases access to physicians. The situation in Texas was that there was no high risk Ob-Gyn doc south of San Antonio and no Ob-Gyn’s at all in the Rio Grande valley. The situation was insane. Huge billboards of lawyers to sue physicians. This has all changed and the Ob-Gyn’s have moved back to Texas. One of the big names in that effort was Jim Rohack MD, who is the AMA president elect and is featured prominently in the article.
Note that medical liability caps are for non-economic or so called “pain and suffering” awards.
I am highly incredulous that any real liability reform will come about. The trial lawyers have lined the Democrats pockets too well. Call me cynical, but he is floating this out knowing that his own will kill it before it is born (should I say abort it?).
How much will this save? Go to any ER with the complaint of headache (a very common presenting symptom). If you haven’t had an MRI in the past year, they will do one. It is ridiculous. I try to act responsibly, but I know I can get burned. I have simply been lucky so far. We have a saying in medicine to expect an uncommon presentation of something uncommon rather than a common presentation of something uncommon. But uncommon things do happen. If you happen to be that unlucky physician who sees the patient with a headache (and no other symptoms) that really does have a brain tumor, then you get hosed.
Neither side wants a fair and equitable playing field. One side wants to sue over the headache that turns out to be a tumor and the other side thinks there should be pain and suffering limits when the wrong foot is amputated.
Hey wait…isn’t this the tort reform that Republicans were calling for?
All Obama promises come with an expiration date. At the AMA on Monday:[blockquote] The boos erupted when Obama told the doctors in Chicago he wouldn’t try to help them win their top legislative priority—limits on jury damages in medical malpractice cases.[/blockquote][url=http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98RBO9G0&show_article=1]Source[/url]