Pennsylvania Medical Malpractice Subsidy Program Lapses; Tennessee House Approves Malpractice Legislation

Main Category: Litigation / Medical Malpractice
Article Date: 07 Apr 2008 - 11:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Pennsylvania: A tax-subsidized program that helps Pennsylvania physicians pay medical malpractice insurance premiums lapsed on Monday, the AP/Philadelphia Inquirer reports. The five-year, $1 billion MCare abatement program was established in 2003 and provides subsidies to more than 35,000 physicians and other medical professionals. The subsidy on average has saved primary care physicians $1,500 per year and specialists on average $15,000 annually, according to Amy Kelchner, a spokesperson for Gov. Ed Rendell (D). The program was paid for through a 25-cent-per-pack increase in the cigarette tax and money from an insurance fund generated by traffic ticket surcharges (Levy, AP/Philadelphia Inquirer, 4/1). Rendell supports a 10-year extension of the abatement program but has said that he will not approve an extension unless lawmakers show progress in making affordable health coverage available to the uninsured (Fahy, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 4/1). The Democratic-controlled House on March 17 approved a bill (SB 1137) that would expand subsidized health coverage to an additional 220,000 uninsured adults at a cost of about $1 billion. Rendell has announced his support of the House bill (AP/Philadelphia Inquirer, 4/1). However, Senate Republicans have expressed concerns about the cost of the measure and have noted that Democrats have not identified a funding source (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 4/1).

Tennessee: The state House on Thursday voted 93-1 to approve a bill that would require defendants in medical malpractice lawsuits to be given 60 days notice before a lawsuit is filed, the AP/Tennessean reports. The bill also would require that an independent medical expert evaluate the merits of a case before the lawsuit is filed, according to bill sponsor state Rep. Doug Overbey (R). Overbey said the 60-day requirement "would allow the proposed defendant to say, 'No, it wasn't me, you've got the wrong person, or you're misreading the medical records,'" adding, "So, it may lead to suits not even being filed." State Rep. Henry Fincher (D), the single dissenter, said he does not believe the legislation is necessary because "our courts already have rules to weed out bad or weak cases." He said, "I'm a strong supporter of the jury process," adding, "Although I'm pleased with the compromise, I don't feel ... this was really necessary." According to Russ Miller, vice president of the Tennessee Medical Association, the legislation is necessary because roughly 80% of malpractice lawsuits in the state result in no payouts to the plaintiffs. The legislation will now go to the Senate for its consideration. Last year, the Senate unanimously passed similar legislation (Johnson, AP/Tennessean, 4/4).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation© 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations