An Illinois House committee voted 12-2 last month for a proposal backed by doctors and Republicans to cap noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering that malpractice victims can win in court, only to see it stymied in the floor when Democrats proposed amendments that would have gutted the bill. The proposal also included protecting doctors’ personal assets in lawsuits and shielding hospitals from some legal claims.
Supporters, including a group of downstate Democrats who believe the bill is a political imperative, said the changes are essential to lower costs that have driven dozens of doctors out of their practices in Illinois.
“It’s a real bitter pill for many of us, but it’s necessary,” said Rep. Tom Holbrook, a Belleville Democrat sponsoring the bill.
As the measure headed to the House floor for a vote, lawmakers and lobbyists who predicted it would undergo a makeover amid a bitter fight were proven correct.Opponents including trial lawyers and some Democrats blasted the proposal as unfair to victims and unconstitutional.
“If this bill ever becomes law, doctors and hospitals probably won’t need insurance,” said Keith Hebeisen of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, who dubbed the measure the “wrongdoer protection act.”
Even supporters said some new powers for state regulators to oversee insurance rates and punish bad doctors could be scaled back. Democrat leaders who have opposed caps strenuously said they can’t predict the measure’s outcome but are tired of taking heat for the long stalemate over malpractice legislation.
“I hope that you’re not being made pawns in a political game,” Rep. John Fritchey told supporters who applauded the bill’s passage.
Award caps have long been fought by trial lawyers and leaders in the Democratic-controlled Generaly Assembly, but House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President Emil Jones, both Chicago Democrats, said they would let lawmakers vote on the idea.
Republican lawmakers worried all along the measures could be a political ruse to thwart more significant changes.
“If it looks too good to be true, it’s not true,” said Sen. Dave Luechtefeld, R-Okawville. “It’s hard for me to believe that you could be totally against it (caps) and all of a sudden you’re for it.”
The scenario is similar to last year, when lawmakers talked for months about the issue but ultimately left town without doing anything. Madigan even held one vote on legislation that included caps but didn’t allow a final vote that would have sent it to the Senate.
Both sides say this year is different. The problem of doctors leaving their practices, especially in downstate and rural parts of Illinois, because of high insurance rates has forced lawmakers to take the issue more seriously.
“I don’t know that anyone can tell you what the next couple of weeks are going to hold,” said Rep. John Fritchey, D-Chicago. “I believe that the speaker is sincere in his desire to get something done. It remains to be seen how much support is out there from either party.”
Doctors and Republicans say caps will curb the out-of-control lawsuits they claim are driving up insurance costs. Trial lawyers and Democrats argue that insurers’ business practices and bad doctors are to blame. The reaction to the latest proposals demonstrates how complex the issue is.
The Illinois State Medical Society, the main lobbying arm for doctors, likes the proposals’ lawsuit caps but says other parts, particularly “onerous” insurance regulations, raise concerns. After pushing Democrats to support caps, the society could end up opposing the measure. Meanwhile, the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association continues to blast award caps as unconstitutional limits on victims’ rights.
Some advocates fear the differences in the House and Senate plans could lead to further gridlock, with each chamber approving one version and refusing to consider the other. The House bill wold cap noneconomic damages at $250,000 for doctors and $500,000 for hospitals, while the Senate plan would double those amounts.
Both Jones and Madigan still oppose caps, even though they have agreed to let the bills move forward. Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said the speaker is committed to significant reform but hasn’t “finalized his thinking” on what he will support. Even some Democrats question whether the latest proposals would provide more political cover for lawmakers than benefit to doctors.
“Unfortunately, we’re playing political ping-pong with caps,” said Sen. Ira Silverstein, D-Chicago. “This is all feel-good legislation for everybody.”
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Topics Legislation Illinois
Was this article valuable?
Here are more articles you may enjoy.
Rising Prices, Low Satisfaction Drive 49% of Customers to Shop For New Auto Insurance 
Geopolitical Risks: Why Underwriters Are Watching Aggregations 
Biden Vetoes Bid to Repeal US Labor Board Rule on Contract, Franchise Workers 
The Top 15 U.S. Metros with High Exposure to Wildfire Risk 
