side note: The disconcerting thing with this debate is that many of the people in the press offering solutions don’t really understand the problem. This presents old ideas as new and misleads citizens into believing there is a qiuck fix to this problem.

WASHINGTON | President Barack Obama’s willingness to consider alternatives to medical malpractice lawsuits is providing a boost for taking such cases out of the courtroom and letting experts, not juries, decide their merits.

Appointing neutral experts to sift facts from allegations appeals to conservatives in both political parties. They want to address medical liability as part of health care legislation. Trial lawyers oppose the curbs.

Nonetheless, the American Hospital Association has been shopping a new plan to lawmakers, hoping it will be considered during Senate floor debate on health care in the coming weeks.

Separately, at a Health and Human Services hearing this week, proponents of the idea will urge the administration to provide funds for a pilot program. Obama has set aside $25 million to test a range of alternatives to malpractice litigation, and the hearing is the first step in deciding how to distribute it.
(more…)

side note: I think the insurance industry made a serious miscalculation when it released the report stating that it would raise premiums if reform legislation passes. Look at the potentially damaging outcome that may come from the industry’s obstinance.

Democrats in Congress moved Wednesday to repeal the health insurance industry’s exemption from antitrust laws, cranking up the pressure in a growing battle over President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform plans.

The moves were the latest chapter in an escalating feud between the industry and backers of sweeping healthcare reform that would tighten regulations and create a government-run public insurance option to compete with private insurers.

The fight intensified after an industry lobbying group issued a report saying the healthcare reform plan under consideration in Congress would raise insurance premiums, which sparked protests from Democrats and the White House.

“It’s time to level the playing field for American healthcare consumers and make the insurance industry play by the same rules that other industries live by,” Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said.

Proposals in the Senate and House of Representatives would repeal or refine the antitrust exemption granted the industry in 1945. Supporters said the exemption limited competition in an industry where one or two companies often dominate a state insurance market.

“It’s a different universe today than it was in 1945, and this exemption is antiquated, out-of-date, and doesn’t belong,” Democratic Senator Charles Schumer said.

Senate Democratic leaders said they would offer their proposal to repeal the exemption as an amendment to a sweeping bill to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system when it hits the Senate floor in the next few weeks.
(more…)

side note: This could be the silent strufggle in the healthcare debate. Conservatives on both sides of the aisle could walk away with some sort of victory in the wake of what is now looking to be inevitable healthcare reform legislation.

President Barack Obama’s willingness to consider alternatives to medical malpractice lawsuits is providing a boost for taking such cases out of the courtroom and letting experts, not juries, decide their merits.

The idea of appointing neutral experts to sift malpractice facts from allegations appeals to conservatives in both political parties. They want to address medical liability as part of health care legislation that’s now largely silent on the issue. Trial lawyers remain steadfastly opposed to curbs.

Nonetheless, the American Hospital Association has been shopping a new plan to lawmakers, hoping it will be considered during Senate floor debate on health care in the coming weeks.

Separately, at a Health and Human Services hearing next week, proponents of the idea will urge the administration to provide funds for a pilot program. Obama has set aside $25 million to test a range of alternatives to malpractice litigation, and the hearing is the first step in deciding how to distribute it.

“There is a progressive opportunity here to leapfrog what has been a stereotypically polarized debate in Washington,” said Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute, a centrist Democratic think tank. “This serves both progressive and conservative goals. You wouldn’t have to have a terrible injury and attract an enterprising malpractice lawyer to have access to court. And it would reduce malpractice premiums.”
(more…)

side note: This article end with the question as to whether Republicans will ultimately miss an opportunity to enact tort reform because of their overriding goal of blocking any healthcare reform at all. Republicans need to view the healthcare debate as an opportunity to achieve some of their goals, not just to block other’s goals.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s willingness to consider alternatives to medical malpractice lawsuits is providing a boost for taking such cases out of the courtroom and letting experts, not juries, decide their merits.

The idea of appointing neutral experts to sift malpractice facts from allegations appeals to conservatives in both political parties. They want to address medical liability as part of health care legislation that’s now largely silent on the issue. Trial lawyers remain steadfastly opposed to curbs.

Nonetheless, the American Hospital Association has been shopping a new plan to lawmakers, hoping it will be considered during Senate floor debate on health care in the coming weeks.

Separately, at a Health and Human Services hearing next week, proponents of the idea will urge the administration to provide funds for a pilot program. Obama has set aside $25 million to test a range of alternatives to malpractice litigation, and the hearing is the first step in deciding how to distribute it.

“There is a progressive opportunity here to leapfrog what has been a stereotypically polarized debate in Washington,” said Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute, a centrist Democratic think tank. “This serves both progressive and conservative goals. You wouldn’t have to have a terrible injury and attract an enterprising malpractice lawyer to have access to court. And it would reduce malpractice premiums.”

Doctors have maintained for years that fear of being sued leads them to order unneeded tests that raise costs for everyone. In Obama, they’ve found a Democratic president who accepts that premise.
(more…)

side note: it may be way, way late in the game, but Republicans are looking to add their two cents to what reforms are necessary to fix healthcare. Perhaps if they didn’t spend so many months saying that reform wasn’t necessary, these ideas would have a better chance of being included in the final bill.

Republicans will seek amendments to parts of the Democrat’s healthcare reform they oppose, rather than push for an alternative plan to overhaul the $2.5 trillion system, a key senator said Monday.

Conservatives are seeking changes that would limit medical malpractice liability and do away with any requirement for consumers to buy a health insurance policy, said Sen. Charles Grassley, speaking at the Reuters Washington Summit.

He would also like to enable consumers to purchase insurance policies across state lines. Insurance is currently regulated at the state level, with consumers unable to purchase from firms that do not sell plans in their state.

“I just hope that we’re able to keep this bill from getting any worse,” said Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee.

Congressional Democrats are unlikely to support those proposed changes, and Grassley conceded the bill could pass without any concessions to Republicans as long as the chamber’s 60 Democrats stick together.

To win Republican backing, the measure also would have to exclude any government-run health insurance option, Grassley added. If such concerns are addressed, Democrats “might get a lot of Republican support,” he told Reuters.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s top domestic policy is to produce a healthcare reform package that provides more people with insurance coverage and cuts costs.
(more…)

Medical Liability Monitor’s 2009 Rate Survey shows physicians’ malpractice insurance market remains soft

Chicago—Rates for physicians’ 2009-2010 liability insurance premiums decreased or remained stable for the large majority of doctors, according to Medical Liability Monitor’s annual nationwide Rate Survey released this week.

This year’s study found 58 percent of rates did not change between 2008 and 2009; in fact, 19 percent of rates experienced a 0.1- to 9.9-percent rate decrease, while less than 10 percent of all rates experienced an increase. This continues the stabilizing trend found in the 2007 and 2008 Rate Surveys.

“Rates in 2009 remain remarkably stable, with very few moving upward from last year,” said Michael Matray, Medical Liability Monitor editor. “And according to our survey, more than 70 percent of responding companies reported filing at least some rate reductions in 2009. Overall, the majority of rates did not change at all from last year.”

Since 1991 Medical Liability Monitor, an independent newsletter, has been surveying the leading providers of medical professional liability insurance for its annual rate report. This year’s survey reports rates from 40 companies that represent as much as 75 percent of the physician’s malpractice insurance market. It is the most comprehensive report on physicians’ liability insurance rates available.

“While there were a few companies that reported rate increases, they appear to be multi-state insurers adjusting pricing to the levels of existing competitors,” Matray said. “Six of the industry’s larger insurers did report isolated rate reductions, and a number of these insurers have been active purchasers of other insurance organizations in recent years.”

In this year’s Rate Survey, Medical Liability Monitor added questions regarding the potential impact of electronic medical records and “never event reporting” on the industry. While about a third of respondents agree that never event reporting is likely to increase the frequency of future claims, the majority had no opinion or were unaware of these issues. It is possible that—during a period where companies are focused on maintaining or growing top-line revenue—insurers are not searching out factors suggesting the need to raise pricing or issue declinations.
(more…)