Today's Paper Search Latest App In the news Traffic #Gazette200 Paper Trails Listen Digital FAQ Weather Newsletters Obits Puzzles/Games Archive
ADVERTISEMENT

WASHINGTON -- Under a bill drafted by House Republicans as part of their plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, some Americans would find it more difficult to win lawsuits for injuries caused by medical malpractice or defective drugs or medical devices.

The bill would impose new limits on lawsuits involving care covered by Medicare, Medicaid or private health insurance subsidized by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The limits would apply to some product liability claims, as well as to medical malpractice lawsuits involving doctors, hospitals and nursing homes.

But Democrats and plaintiffs' lawyers said it would take rights away from people served by federal health programs, including those harmed by medical mistakes.

In renewing their effort to devise a replacement for the Affordable Care Act, Republicans say one chief goal is to slow the growth of health spending. Rep. Robert Goodlatte, R-Va., the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the malpractice limits would reduce health costs, increase access to care and save taxpayers billions of dollars.

[INTERACTIVE: Compare new health care proposal with Affordable Care Act]

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the legislation would reduce federal budget deficits by almost $50 billion over 10 years. Under the bill, the budget office said, doctors would slightly decrease the use of diagnostic tests and other services that they perform to reduce their exposure to lawsuits. Doctors have long said such "defensive medicine" adds to the cost of care.

But Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said the bill would deny full restitution to many victims of medical malpractice. Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., said the bill's restrictions would apply even in cases of "egregious medical error," such as when a foreign object is left inside a patient's body or surgery is performed on the wrong body part.

The bill would not limit a patient's ability to recover economic damages, for medical expenses or lost earnings. If more than one defendant was responsible for an injury, the jury would award damages against each one in proportion to the share of responsibility.

The bill also says a doctor who prescribes a drug or medical device "approved, licensed or cleared by the Food and Drug Administration" may not be named in a product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer or seller of the product. The bill provides similar protection for pharmacists who fill prescriptions. The bill would restrict contingency fees that lawyers can charge for representing plaintiffs in health care lawsuits.

And the measure would limit claims related to coverage provided "via a federal program, subsidy or tax benefit" -- meaning the House bill would apply to health insurance provided by employers, because the federal government provides a tax break for such coverage, said Brian Atchinson, president of the Physician Insurers Association of America, a trade group for insurers.

The tax-free treatment of employer-provided health benefits is one of the largest tax breaks in the tax code, costing the government more than $150 billion a year in lost revenue, according to the Congressional Research Service.

The costs of the medical malpractice system have been hotly debated for years. Several studies suggest that the costs, including damage awards, legal fees and the effects of defensive medicine, may represent 2 percent to 2.5 percent of national health spending.

The House bill is supported by the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association and the American Health Care Association, a trade group for nursing homes. But manufacturers of medical devices have mixed feelings about it.

"We support the overall intent of the bill, to reduce litigation burdens on the health care system," said Greg Crist, a spokesman for the Advanced Medical Technology Association, which represents device-makers. "But some of our members are concerned that the bill could actually have the opposite effect and could increase burdens on manufacturers by insulating doctors and other health care providers from any liability related to devices."

A Section on 04/16/2017

Print Headline: House bill targets malpractice suits

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsor Content

Archived Comments

  • TimberTopper
    April 16, 2017 at 4:39 a.m.

    Ah yes, the Republicans want to take away the average Americans right to fair compensation for being wronged. The lobby and big corporate America first, to hell with the people.

  • ARTOPCAT
    April 16, 2017 at 1:51 p.m.

    TimberTopper - Better yet, let's line the pockets of ambulance-chasing trial lawyers. Now that's a good spend of our health care dollar. Legitimate claims and cases will always have a venue for credible hearings.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT