| SUPPORT |
|
|
WRITE
YOUR |
| TERM |
|
|
CONGRESSMAN |
| LIMITS |
|
|
IT WORKS!! |
The article on this page is owned and copyrighted by
the named author
Why Doctors
Are Heading for Texas

Link To Original Article: http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB121097874071799863.html
Joseph Nixon
May 17, 2008
When Sam Houston was still
hanging his hat in Tennessee in the 1830s, it wasn't uncommon for fellow
Tennesseans who were packing up and moving south and west to hang a sign on
their cabins that read "GTT" – Gone to Texas.
Today obstetricians,
surgeons and other doctors might consider reviving the practice. Over the past
three years, some 7,000 M.D.s have flooded into Texas, many from
Tennessee.
Why? Two words: Tort reform.
In 2003 and in 2005, Texas
enacted a series of reforms to the state's civil justice system. They are
stunning in their success. Texas Medical Liability Trust, one of the largest
malpractice insurance companies in the state, has slashed its premiums by 35%,
saving doctors some $217 million over four years. There is also a competitive
malpractice insurance industry in Texas, with over 30 companies competing for
business. This is driving rates down.
The result is an influx of doctors
so great that recently the State Board of Medical Examiners couldn't process all
the new medical-license applications quickly enough. The board faced a backlog
of 3,000 applications. To handle the extra workload, the legislature rushed
through an emergency appropriation last year.
Now many of the newly
arriving doctors are heading to rural or underserved parts of the state. Four
new anesthesiologists have headed to Beaumont, for example. Meanwhile, San
Antonio has experienced a 52% growth in the number of new doctors.
But if
tort reform has been a boon – and it is likely one of the reasons the state's
economy has thrived in recent years – it was not easy to enact.
In one
particularly grueling fight in the legislature in 2003, an important piece of a
reform bill went down to a narrow defeat in the state Senate after a single
Republican switched his support to vote against it. Republican Gov. Rick Perry
was so incensed that he bolted out of his office in the Capitol, sprinted into
the Senate chamber, and vaulted a railing to come face to face with the
defecting senator.
That confrontation fizzled, however, and before long
Texas succeeded at enacting two simple but effective reforms. One capped medical
malpractice awards for noneconomic damages at $250,000, changed the burden of
proof for claiming injury for emergency room care from simple negligence to
"willful and wanton neglect," and required that an independent medical expert
file a report in support of the claimant.
This has allowed doctors and
hospitals to cut costs and even increase the resources devoted to charity care.
Take Christus Health, a nonprofit Catholic health system across the state.
Thanks to tort reform, over the past four years Christus saved $100 million that
it otherwise would have spent fending off bogus lawsuits or paying higher
insurance premiums. Every dollar saved was reinvested in helping poor
patients.
The second 2003 reform cleaned up much of the mess surrounding
asbestos litigation by creating something called multidistrict litigation (MDL).
This took every case in the state involving a common injury or complaint, like
silicosis or asbestosis, and consolidated it for pretrial discovery in one
court.
One judge now makes all pretrial discovery and evidence rulings,
including the validity of expert doctor reports, for all cases. This creates
legal consistency and virtually eliminates "venue shopping" – a process by which
trial lawyers file briefs in districts that they know will be friendly to
frivolous suits. Trials still occur in plaintiffs' home counties.
More
change sailed through the legislature in 2005; tort reform had become popular
with voters and lobbying against it was ineffectual. The 2005 reform created
minimum medical standards to prove an injury in asbestos and silica cases. Now
plaintiffs must show diminished lung capacity in addition to an X-ray indicating
disease.
In sum, these reforms have worked wonders. There are about
85,000 asbestos plaintiffs in Texas. Under the old system, each would be
advancing in the courts. But in the four years since the creation of MDLs, only
300 plaintiffs' cases have been certified ready for trial. And in each case the
plaintiff is almost certainly sick with mesothelioma or cancer.
No one
else claiming "asbestosis" has yet filed a pulmonology report showing diminished
lung capacity. This means that only one-third of 1% of all those people who have
filed suit claiming they were sick with asbestosis have actually had a qualified
and impartial doctor agree that they have an asbestos-caused illness.
In
the silica MDL, there are somewhere between 4,000 and 6,000 plaintiff cases. In
the four years since the cases were consolidated under the MDL, 47 plaintiffs
have filed a motion to proceed to trial based on a medical report indicating
diminished pulmonary capacity. Of those 47, the court has certified 29 people as
having diminished lung capacity. This, too, is less than 1% of all the
"silicosis" claims made in Texas. No one has proven the real cause of his
illness to be silica, as no case yet has been certified for trial.
Before
the asbestos and silica MDLs were created, nonmalignancy plaintiffs settled with
defendants for anywhere between $30,000 to $150,000 per case. No one knows how
many bogus cases were settled in the state with large cash payments. Lawyers who
specialized in defending those cases say there were tens of
thousands.
The full costs of large settlements and runaway malpractice
suits may never be known. But it is clear that the costs were paid for by
consumers through the increased price of goods, by pensioners through diminished
stock prices, and by workers through lost jobs. Another group often overlooked
is those who are priced out of health care, or who didn't receive charity care
because doctors were squeezed by tort lawyers. Frivolous lawsuits hit the
uninsured the hardest.
Texas recently became home to more Fortune 500
companies than New York and California. Things are trending well for the Lone
Star State. Anecdotally, we can see that while doctors are moving in, trial
lawyers are packing up and heading west. They're GTC -- Gone to
California.
Mr. Nixon, a former
member of the Texas House of Representatives, is a senior fellow at the Texas
Public Policy Foundation.