As I recall, didn't Texas enact medical tort reform in 2005?

[bluestateguy]

There was a voter approved initiative to cap "non-economic" damages (whatever that means) to $250,000. So my question is, after the voters approved this initiative, did the malpractice insurance companies lower their premiums?

[northoftheborder]

1. Tort reform in Texas

Yes, Texas leg. did vote in tort reform, limiting damages, and I can't quote any data on top of my head, but know it has been proved that this did NOT have an effect on premiums for doctors' liability insurance.

[WolverineDG]

2. No, according to my doc nt

[onestepforward]

3. No, not at all. I found this information:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/mahabarbara/2009/06/seducing-the-states-with-tort.php

snip-
In April Newt Gingrich penned an op-ed for the Philadelphia Inquirer in which he claimed tort "States that have enacted tort-reform measures have significantly improved access to health care, reduced costs, and strengthened economies." As Exhibit A he trotted out a comprehensive tort reform law enacted by Texas in 2003.

The problem with that picture is that health care costs in Texas not only continued to rise after 2003; they rose more than in most of the rest of the country. In 2008, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found that Texans enjoyed the third fastest increase in health insurance premiums in the nation. And for many years Texas has led the nation in the percentage of its citizens without health insurance. The 2003 tort reform didn't change that."
snip-

[jonathan_seer]

4. The effect has been to make it impossible to file Malpractice unless you are well-off

Beyond limiting awards, you have to pay the lawyer before the case can even begin.

The is NO such thing as "on contingency" because the award cap makes charging based on compensation not worth the trouble.

Imagine just out of the hospital your job is at risk from missing too much time and you're barely making ends meet after being a victim of obvious malpractice on the part of your doctor.

Well if someone in Texas thinks file for malpractice, forget it. The law ended the past practice of many lawyers who charged to fight malpractice cases on contingency.

Rich people who can afford and are willing to pay all the fees upfront in order to win it all back later still do file malpractice, but malpractice no longer exists as an option for the average upper-middle class and lower Texan.

It is not so much what the law literally says as much as it is written to take all the incentive out of filing malpractice suits.

For lawyers it's just another fee based case - and one still pitting the lawyer against a highly paid team of lawyers who do nothing but defend against such cases.

It's interesting reading the propoganda of those who think it was a success.

They mention that insurance premiums for some docs have been cut in half, but don't mention it hasn't slowed the rise in fees to the public one iota.

They also like to brag that Drs. are moving to Texas to take advantage of this.

They don't mention that a significant # of them are the worst of the worst, lured to Texas because they're protected fin Texas from the consequences of their own professional negligence.

Good Drs. will make a nice living wherever they are. Malpractice premiums may be higher elsewhere, but competence compensates by making the good doctor a popular doctor who never hurts for patients and compensation.

Additionally they can live wherever they like and many can't justify moving to Texas to take advantage of the lack of malpractice lawsuits when it simply isn't a big issue for competent professionals.

I personally dread the thought of getting ill here. It's a big reason why all my long term plans are to move elsewhere. I have heard too many horror stories from neighbors and friends who suffered grievously at the hands of their Doctor, and had to pay for the treatment to fix the mess the Dr. created, while he suffered no consequences whatsoever, I kid you not.

[jonathan_seer]

5. There is NO Texas Initiative Process - which means Voters didn't have a vote on the tort reform

There is a budding movement to get that right for Texas voters, but as it stands now the laws of Texas has a very traditional law making process. Legislature writes and passes, governor signs.

Texas voters do not have a system where they can vote yea or nay on a specific law say like in California.

[TexasThoughtCriminal]

6. Voters DID vote for it

It was a constitutional amendment called Proposition 12.
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x320319

[sonias]

7. It was a very close call

Less than 3% points statewide. About 33,000 people who made the difference.

You can look up the official results on the SoS website. Just pick the 2003 Constitutional election.
elections.sos.state.tx.us/elchist.exe

Prop 12 Suits against doctors and providers

IN FAVOR		 751,896	51.13%
AGAINST		         718,547	48.86%
			-----------	
    Race Total	        1,470,443	

And let's bring back that classic piece by Mimi Schwartz

Hurt? Injured? Need a Lawyer? Too Bad! -- great report in Texas Monthly
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x22306">DU Texas thread

Full article here. I couldn't find it on the Texas Monthly website archives.