Proposition 12 is only slightly about medical malpractice. Check out this weekend?’s Statesman article listing the various businesses that are pumping millions in support of Prop 12. Do HEB or WalMart practice medicine? Do they care about medical issues? Of course not. They are attempting to throw away centuries of tradition in the jury system in Texas, something our Founding Fathers found important enough to place in the 7th amendment to the US Constitution. Prop 12 is really about big businesses wanting to avoid have to fully compensate you when their conduct has caused you harm.

If ?– and I truly question this premise ?– medical malpractice litigation is in a crisis situation, then why didn?’t state senator Joe Nixon tie mandatory reductions in medical malpractice insurance premiums for doctors?? For that matter, why did this legislative sponsor of tort reform have HIS $300,000 mold claim paid by the big insurance company, and then get an additional $30,000 which internal insurance documents revealed would help them get tort reform passed? This is greasy politics at its worst. Further, in states where similar caps exist, insurance rates did not decline signficantly. This is a red herring, pure and simple.

Forget Prop 12 for a minute. House Bill 4, also passed this session, creates such broad, unprecedented tort reform in the rules and practices governing ALL civil cases that it will be extremely difficult even for rock solid, meritorious cases to ever go to trial. You don?’t hear anything about this law that?’s already in place. For example, if you have a strong case, reject a settlement offer, and WIN at trial but win less than 120% of what was offered, you have to pay the other side?’s costs and attorneys?’ fees. That?’s absolutely ridiculous. These rules are in play now, without Prop 12.

Prop 12 seeks to cap damages in all med mal suits, regardless of the circumstances of the individual case. If you happened to have an emergency, go to a hospital, and a doctor with a drug or alcohol problem butchers your spouse, child or yourself, then your noneconomic damages ?– e.g., pain and suffering, disfigurement, embarrassment, lost of enjoyment of life in the future ?– AT MOST are limited to $250,000 per defendant, up to a total of $750,000. Think about that. How much is your breast, kidney, eye, face, body or life worth, if you?’re the victim of a clearly avoidable act of negligence? One size does not fit all when you?’re valuing human lives.

And you know what else? Prop 12 is not limited to med mal cases. You?’d think so from all the propaganda, but that?’s not the truth. The language at issue allows caps for damages in ALL civil actions. So, the damages caps above could apply to the drunk driver who maims or kills your family. To the car manufacturers who knowingly sell you a car whose gas tank is known to explode on impact. To drug companies that quickly get a pill to market, knowing it has potentially fatal consequences. And so on. Is that justice? Not in my book.

Court rules, trial judges and the court of appeals traditionally have reduced the huge, so-called runaway jury verdicts that you often see in the news. Stripping juries of their constitutional place in America, however, is an affront to our tradition and to our justice system. That?’s why I?’m voting against Prop 12. I hope you will too.

H.E.B., Wal-Mart & Prop. 12


H.E.B. and Wal-Mart have legitimate reason to support Proposition 12. These two are big companies employ thousands of employees. They have to pay all these employees?’ and their families?’ health insurance. It is a big financial burden to the business when they cannot raise the prices of their merchandise too much due to the competition but the cost of the employees?’ health insurance has been going up and up with no end in sight.

I know some small companies have to reduce the number of employees in order to stay in business because of the health insurance cost. Some companies also let their employees share the burden of the premium payment.

Vanishing doctors?

Carlos Guerra: 'Liar, liar, pants on fire' hurled at claim of vanishing doctors


Web Posted : 09/07/2003 12:00 AM

A positive outlook ?— laced with healthy skepticism ?— was part of his upbringing, Chris Junker says.
''I studied accounting and I worked as an auditor,'' he explained, ''but it was my father who told us to always check the facts.''

Now in the commercial security systems business in Houston, Junker called after finding a column I wrote in April about medical malpractice insurance.

''I was impressed that you found that 6.5 percent of Texas doctors were responsible for 51 percent of awards,'' he said, ''so I wanted to show you what I found.''

Junker pointed out that he isn't a lawyer and doesn't work for one. He considers his doctor a friend and has cousins who are physicians.

But after watching the TV ads about malpractice insurance costs driving doctors out of their profession, he got curious. Then, he got a campaign mailer at home saying that his doctor might close his practice if Proposition 12 fails.

Proposition 12, one of 22 constitutional amendments in Saturday's election, would empower legislators to cap awards for medical malpractice and other civil claims.

Junker says he called the Yes On 12's campaign to see how many doctors Texas had lost and they had no numbers. So, he started looking himself and finally called the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners, where he was directed to the statistics page on their Web site: www.tsbme.state.tx.us.

According to TSBME, 31,071 medical and osteopathic doctors were practicing in Texas in May 1997 and 33,999 in May 2000. By May 2003, there were 38,035.

''I saw that and I thought, 'Liar, liar, pants on fire,''' Junker said.

The state board's reports on doctors by counties also seem to disprove the claim that runaway jury awards are driving doctors out of the Lower Rio Grande Valley in droves.

In 2000, the Valley's two most populous counties, Hidalgo and Cameron, had 943 doctors, but in 2003, there are 1,095, an increase of 16 percent in three years.

Steve Delisi, Yes On 12 campaign director, refused to discuss these statistics, referring me, instead, to the Texas Medical Association.

TMA's communication director, Steve Levine was out. When he called back, he said the figures don't reflect the lack of care in some areas:

''What we're seeing is not reflected in numbers of people holding licenses but in the number who are providing care and in the kinds of services they are providing.''

He also sent me news releases of two ''studies'' concluding that doctors are curtailing services and are planning to retire earlier.

But both are TMA member studies conducted to bolster its case for capping malpractice awards, so they aren't exactly unbiased.

While I was waiting for Levine to call back, I did stumble on another interesting tidbit on the TMA's own Web site.

In a 2001 article, ''Right On Target: Status of the Physician Workforce in Texas'' it was reported that in 1999, TMA used computer modeling to analyze future access to doctors in the Lone Star State.

''How many physicians does Texas need to serve its current and future populations?'' it asked. ''According to today's estimates, the state's physician workforce size is right on target to serve citizens' current and future medical needs,'' but it added that ''by 2005, Texas will have a negligible surplus of 1,614 physicians.''

Can you believe the timing? They will be here just in time to cover for the malpractice exodus.

Yes, they are losing interest!

Applications to the nation's medical schools DROPPED for the sixth straight year in 2002, representing a fall of nearly 22 percent since 1997, the American Medical Association reports today. (Boston Globe)

Prospective medical students for 2003-2004 are faced with more than just the tough MCAT. Rising tuition costs, decreasing physician salaries, a troubled medical system, and increased costs of malpractice insurance are all factors that have affected recent applicant pools, and they are leading many prospective students to reconsider medical careers. (Princeton Review)