CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years

sciwizam

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2004
1,953
0
0
Link

Direct link to the CBO Study (pdf)

Bolstering what's likely to be a key health care reform argument from Republicans, Congress' budget scorekeeper ruled that limiting medical malpractice lawsuits would reduce the federal deficit by $54 billion over 10 years.

The Congressional Budget Office - in an analysis that projects a nearly10-fold increase in savings over its findings last year - said tort reform would cut costs by limiting the use of diagnostic tests and other services health care providers and doctors use to reduce exposure to lawsuits.

In explaining the increase in savings, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told lawmakers "recent research has provided additional evidence that lowering the cost of medical malpractice tends to reduce the use of health care services."

Tort reform has been one of Republicans' top health care reform proposals, but it hasn't been embraced by congressional Democrats. President Obama, in his address to a joint session of Congress last month, said he would consider tort reform legislation as part of his health care plan.

"I think that this is an important step in the right direction and these numbers show that this problem deserves more than lip service from policymakers," said Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, who requested the analysis.

"Unfortunately, up to now, that has been all the president and his Democratic allies in Congress have been willing to provide on these issues."

The analysis was not tied to specific legislation, but cited reform ideas such as limiting pain-and-suffering awards to $250,000, limiting punitive damage awards at $500,000, limiting attorneys fees or implementing a one- to three-year statute of limitation.

Such proposals would reduce national health care spending by about 0.5 percent, or $11 billion in 2009. That includes the reduction in malpractice premiums as well as a 0.3 percent reduction in health care services spending from providers ordering procedures out of concern for being sued.

The group found that this year, health care providers will spend about $35 billion on malpractice liability, including premiums and awards.

The American Association for Justice, a trial lawyers trade group, said the news from CBO shows that there is limited financial gain and much health risk at reforming medical malpractice laws.

The "findings reiterate what we've always known, that medical malpractice claims have almost no effect on overall health care spending," association President Anthony Tarricone said Friday. "Along with the CBO's numbers and countless other academic assessments, the vast majority of empirical evidence suggests that there are only minuscule savings to be found in reforming our nation's civil justice system."

The CBO said there was not enough evidence to determine whether reforming medical malpractice laws, designed to let patients sue for damages resulting from negligent care, would have a negative impact on health outcomes. The group cited studies that showed mix results.

Republicans praised the $54 billion in potential savings.

"Doctors often order tests just to protect themselves from lawsuits, not to treat patients," said Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top-ranking Republican on the Finance Committee. "The more federal health care programs spend on unnecessary tests, the less money is available for necessary patient care."

Mr. Grassley also criticized Democrats for not including tort reform in their health reform bills, though any substantial tort plan would likely have to go through the Judiciary Committee, which doesn't have jurisdiction over health care reform.

"It makes no sense that congressional Democrats have taken malpractice reform off the table," he said, citing the $54 billion figure. "That's not chump change. It's a no-brainer to include tort reform in any health care reform legislation."

Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus denied a Republican amendment to add tort reform to his health care plan during his markup session, arguing that it wasn't in the committee's jurisdiction.

Previously, CBO focused its analysis on similar tort reform measures on malpractice insurance premiums. This was the first time CBO based its analysis on how tort reform would affect doctors' use of health care services, based on recent research.

Will be interesting to see if or to what extent tort reform will feature in the final bill.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136
~$6B a yr is still $6B, but a pretty tiny amt of savings. They should still do it regardless, but hardly the worth all the bitching for peanuts.


Dems should gladly give in to Tort reform if it can pull some Reps along with and get this thing done (w/ the medicare for all/public option as the trade)
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
$1000B = $1T

Aren't we like Trillions in debt?

They need to F'ing shoot the head of the respective party that has a Congressperson from their party waste time on sh1t like this.

$6B is good, Yes, but I don't want to think about the amount of time wasted on this when it could been better spent on some more important. Plus, limiting pain and suffering to $250k....that doesn't sound like enough for many cases.

I'll even do the shooting, provide my own gun and ammo...just line me up that Presidential Pardon 'Oh Mr. Nobel Peace Prize!

Chuck
 
May 28, 2006
149
0
0

For all the continuous bitching and crying for tort reform, total medical expenditures for claim costs and malpractice insurance = one half of one percent.

As for Grassley's Strawman argument about unnessessary tests being performed to ward against claims of malpractice, I have two comments. First, doctors get reimbursed for prescribing more tests...my wife recently changed her primary care physician because the doctor was making a killing off the insurer by prescribing and billing for unnessessary tests. Second, if there is a concern about a patient filing a suit due to some doctors incompetence, no number of tests is going to (or should) protect them.

I work for 3 doctors, none of them are poor, or live in a house worth under 1.5 million dollars.

Unfortunately conservative Democrats will probably cave on this issue, in exchange for zero Republican votes.


 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
no doubt. Why the fuck do they say we need tort reform to fix healthcare. We wipe our ass with 6b a year.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,837
2,621
136
Probably based on the assumption that the medical provider community mindset would change (as far as ordering overtesting) 180 degrees overnight if "tort reform" is passed.

Sorry to burst the bubble but that just isn't going to happen. First of all, tort reform is not an A or B state, it is a continum of possible changes. I can guarantee that whatever "tort reform" is passed by Congress will be considered inadequate by a large section of the medical community.

Secondly, we'd have to completely eliminate doctors directly benefitting from ordering overtesting by absolutely prohibiting doctor ownership (including indirectly) of testing facilities. That's a huge contributing factor now.

Some tort reform could be a valuable part of health care reform, but I think the GOP jumping all over this point has more to do with goiring the other party's base while at the same time deflecting attention away from the GOP's sacred cows-such as the enornous waste built into the for-profit system of allocating health insurance converage.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
687
126
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
no doubt. Why the fuck do they say we need tort reform to fix healthcare. We wipe our ass with 6b a year.

$6 billion here and $6 billion there quickly adds up.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Originally posted by: Bitek
~$6B a yr is still $6B, but a pretty tiny amt of savings. They should still do it regardless, but hardly the worth all the bitching for peanuts.


Dems should gladly give in to Tort reform if it can pull some Reps along with and get this thing done (w/ the medicare for all/public option as the trade)

You can find 6 billion dollars cleaning out America's couch.

I love how the Republican's whine about not being included in the healthcare debate even though they have numerous amendments that are to be included yet they will still not vote for it...
 

gingermeggs

Golden Member
Dec 22, 2008
1,157
0
71
Originally posted by: sciwizam
Link

Direct link to the CBO Study (pdf)

Bolstering what's likely to be a key health care reform argument from Republicans, Congress' budget scorekeeper ruled that limiting medical malpractice lawsuits would reduce the federal deficit by $54 billion over 10 years.

The Congressional Budget Office - in an analysis that projects a nearly10-fold increase in savings over its findings last year - said tort reform would cut costs by limiting the use of diagnostic tests and other services health care providers and doctors use to reduce exposure to lawsuits.

In explaining the increase in savings, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told lawmakers "recent research has provided additional evidence that lowering the cost of medical malpractice tends to reduce the use of health care services."

Tort reform has been one of Republicans' top health care reform proposals, but it hasn't been embraced by congressional Democrats. President Obama, in his address to a joint session of Congress last month, said he would consider tort reform legislation as part of his health care plan.

"I think that this is an important step in the right direction and these numbers show that this problem deserves more than lip service from policymakers," said Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, who requested the analysis.

"Unfortunately, up to now, that has been all the president and his Democratic allies in Congress have been willing to provide on these issues."

The analysis was not tied to specific legislation, but cited reform ideas such as limiting pain-and-suffering awards to $250,000, limiting punitive damage awards at $500,000, limiting attorneys fees or implementing a one- to three-year statute of limitation.

Such proposals would reduce national health care spending by about 0.5 percent, or $11 billion in 2009. That includes the reduction in malpractice premiums as well as a 0.3 percent reduction in health care services spending from providers ordering procedures out of concern for being sued.

The group found that this year, health care providers will spend about $35 billion on malpractice liability, including premiums and awards.

The American Association for Justice, a trial lawyers trade group, said the news from CBO shows that there is limited financial gain and much health risk at reforming medical malpractice laws.

The "findings reiterate what we've always known, that medical malpractice claims have almost no effect on overall health care spending," association President Anthony Tarricone said Friday. "Along with the CBO's numbers and countless other academic assessments, the vast majority of empirical evidence suggests that there are only minuscule savings to be found in reforming our nation's civil justice system."

The CBO said there was not enough evidence to determine whether reforming medical malpractice laws, designed to let patients sue for damages resulting from negligent care, would have a negative impact on health outcomes. The group cited studies that showed mix results.

Republicans praised the $54 billion in potential savings.

"Doctors often order tests just to protect themselves from lawsuits, not to treat patients," said Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top-ranking Republican on the Finance Committee. "The more federal health care programs spend on unnecessary tests, the less money is available for necessary patient care."

Mr. Grassley also criticized Democrats for not including tort reform in their health reform bills, though any substantial tort plan would likely have to go through the Judiciary Committee, which doesn't have jurisdiction over health care reform.

"It makes no sense that congressional Democrats have taken malpractice reform off the table," he said, citing the $54 billion figure. "That's not chump change. It's a no-brainer to include tort reform in any health care reform legislation."

Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus denied a Republican amendment to add tort reform to his health care plan during his markup session, arguing that it wasn't in the committee's jurisdiction.

Previously, CBO focused its analysis on similar tort reform measures on malpractice insurance premiums. This was the first time CBO based its analysis on how tort reform would affect doctors' use of health care services, based on recent research.

Will be interesting to see if or to what extent tort reform will feature in the final bill.

yes a lawsuit should not compare with a CEO's bonus.
I think both will be ;reformed.
 

gingermeggs

Golden Member
Dec 22, 2008
1,157
0
71
Originally posted by: chucky2
$1000B = $1T

Aren't we like Trillions in debt?

They need to F'ing shoot the head of the respective party that has a Congressperson from their party waste time on sh1t like this.

$6B is good, Yes, but I don't want to think about the amount of time wasted on this when it could been better spent on some more important. Plus, limiting pain and suffering to $250k....that doesn't sound like enough for many cases.

I'll even do the shooting, provide my own gun and ammo...just line me up that Presidential Pardon 'Oh Mr. Nobel Peace Prize!

Chuck

1.4trill and count up! hope interest rates don't go up soon!
 
Jul 10, 2007
12,041
3
0
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
no doubt. Why the fuck do they say we need tort reform to fix healthcare. We wipe our ass with 6b a year.

it's a good start, and probly prevents it from ballooning even more.
 
Dec 10, 2005
28,150
12,811
136
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: sciwizam
CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years
That's it?

Why worry about $54 Billion when the leftists are saving unicorms.

Have you ever posted anything of substance or do you just troll all the time?

As far as tort reform goes, what do people have in mind? I don't want to limit people's ability to seek compensation in the event a doctor screws up through negligence. I also don't want might seem like ridiculous cases cases being thrown out when only the surface story is reported to the media to whip people up into an anti-lawyer frenzy. Now, I'm not denying the existance of truly ridiculous cases, but those real, ridiculous ones should be easy to dismiss outright after the discovery process shows that something has no merit.

But with only $5.4 billion/year in savings, it seems like there are much bigger fish to fry within medical reform than this.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: sciwizam
CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years
That's it?

Why worry about $54 Billion when the leftists are saving unicorms.

Have you ever posted anything of substance or do you just troll all the time?

As far as tort reform goes, what do people have in mind? I don't want to limit people's ability to seek compensation in the event a doctor screws up through negligence. I also don't want might seem like ridiculous cases cases being thrown out when only the surface story is reported to the media to whip people up into an anti-lawyer frenzy. Now, I'm not denying the existance of truly ridiculous cases, but those real, ridiculous ones should be easy to dismiss outright after the discovery process shows that something has no merit.

But with only $5.4 billion/year in savings, it seems like there are much bigger fish to fry within medical reform than this.

Tort reform is a smokescreen the GOP uses to protect their REAL interest corporate profits to bad some Democrats that were bought off are guilty of this too.

 
Dec 10, 2005
28,150
12,811
136
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: sciwizam
CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years
That's it?

Why worry about $54 Billion when the leftists are saving unicorms.

Have you ever posted anything of substance or do you just troll all the time?

As far as tort reform goes, what do people have in mind? I don't want to limit people's ability to seek compensation in the event a doctor screws up through negligence. I also don't want might seem like ridiculous cases cases being thrown out when only the surface story is reported to the media to whip people up into an anti-lawyer frenzy. Now, I'm not denying the existance of truly ridiculous cases, but those real, ridiculous ones should be easy to dismiss outright after the discovery process shows that something has no merit.

But with only $5.4 billion/year in savings, it seems like there are much bigger fish to fry within medical reform than this.

Tort reform is a smokescreen the GOP uses to protect their REAL interest corporate profits to bad some Democrats that were bought off are guilty of this too.

I do see tort reform as a smokescreen; you only hear about the occasional ridiculous cases because tort-reformists want to whip people into a frenzy and make it seem like ridiculous cases are overloading the court system. How many cases are legitimate that we don't hear a peep about?
 

Budmantom

Lifer
Aug 17, 2002
13,103
1
81
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: sciwizam
CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years
That's it?

Why worry about $54 Billion when the leftists are saving unicorms.

Have you ever posted anything of substance or do you just troll all the time?

As far as tort reform goes, what do people have in mind? I don't want to limit people's ability to seek compensation in the event a doctor screws up through negligence. I also don't want might seem like ridiculous cases cases being thrown out when only the surface story is reported to the media to whip people up into an anti-lawyer frenzy. Now, I'm not denying the existance of truly ridiculous cases, but those real, ridiculous ones should be easy to dismiss outright after the discovery process shows that something has no merit.

But with only $5.4 billion/year in savings, it seems like there are much bigger fish to fry within medical reform than this.

Tort reform is a smokescreen the GOP uses to protect their REAL interest corporate profits to bad some Democrats that were bought off are guilty of this too.

I do see tort reform as a smokescreen; you only hear about the occasional ridiculous cases because tort-reformists want to whip people into a frenzy and make it seem like ridiculous cases are overloading the court system. How many cases are legitimate that we don't hear a peep about?

Smoke screen like "health care reform"? How many people will still be w/o insurance after HCR?

 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: sciwizam
CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years
That's it?

Why worry about $54 Billion when the leftists are saving unicorms.

Have you ever posted anything of substance or do you just troll all the time?

As far as tort reform goes, what do people have in mind? I don't want to limit people's ability to seek compensation in the event a doctor screws up through negligence. I also don't want might seem like ridiculous cases cases being thrown out when only the surface story is reported to the media to whip people up into an anti-lawyer frenzy. Now, I'm not denying the existance of truly ridiculous cases, but those real, ridiculous ones should be easy to dismiss outright after the discovery process shows that something has no merit.

But with only $5.4 billion/year in savings, it seems like there are much bigger fish to fry within medical reform than this.

Tort reform is a smokescreen the GOP uses to protect their REAL interest corporate profits to bad some Democrats that were bought off are guilty of this too.

I do see tort reform as a smokescreen; you only hear about the occasional ridiculous cases because tort-reformists want to whip people into a frenzy and make it seem like ridiculous cases are overloading the court system. How many cases are legitimate that we don't hear a peep about?

Smoke screen like "health care reform"? How many people will still be w/o insurance after HCR?

Well if you side get's any more amendments passed it will be a hell of alot more. ;)
 

Budmantom

Lifer
Aug 17, 2002
13,103
1
81
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: sciwizam
CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years
That's it?

Why worry about $54 Billion when the leftists are saving unicorms.

Have you ever posted anything of substance or do you just troll all the time?

As far as tort reform goes, what do people have in mind? I don't want to limit people's ability to seek compensation in the event a doctor screws up through negligence. I also don't want might seem like ridiculous cases cases being thrown out when only the surface story is reported to the media to whip people up into an anti-lawyer frenzy. Now, I'm not denying the existance of truly ridiculous cases, but those real, ridiculous ones should be easy to dismiss outright after the discovery process shows that something has no merit.

But with only $5.4 billion/year in savings, it seems like there are much bigger fish to fry within medical reform than this.

Tort reform is a smokescreen the GOP uses to protect their REAL interest corporate profits to bad some Democrats that were bought off are guilty of this too.

I do see tort reform as a smokescreen; you only hear about the occasional ridiculous cases because tort-reformists want to whip people into a frenzy and make it seem like ridiculous cases are overloading the court system. How many cases are legitimate that we don't hear a peep about?

Smoke screen like "health care reform"? How many people will still be w/o insurance after HCR?

Well if you side get's any more amendments passed it will be a hell of alot more. ;)

The party w/o any power?

 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: sciwizam

Topic Title: CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years

At whose expense? If tort "reform" legislation comes at the expsense of cutting off victims of incompetent, negligent or malicious health care providers from fair compensation for their injuries, or if it limits penalties against those who commit egregious or repeated breaches of their responsibilities, it's not worth the money it might "save."
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Budmantom
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: sciwizam
CBO: Tort Reform cuts deficit by $54 Billion over 10 years
That's it?

Why worry about $54 Billion when the leftists are saving unicorms.

Have you ever posted anything of substance or do you just troll all the time?

As far as tort reform goes, what do people have in mind? I don't want to limit people's ability to seek compensation in the event a doctor screws up through negligence. I also don't want might seem like ridiculous cases cases being thrown out when only the surface story is reported to the media to whip people up into an anti-lawyer frenzy. Now, I'm not denying the existance of truly ridiculous cases, but those real, ridiculous ones should be easy to dismiss outright after the discovery process shows that something has no merit.

But with only $5.4 billion/year in savings, it seems like there are much bigger fish to fry within medical reform than this.

Tort reform is a smokescreen the GOP uses to protect their REAL interest corporate profits to bad some Democrats that were bought off are guilty of this too.

I do see tort reform as a smokescreen; you only hear about the occasional ridiculous cases because tort-reformists want to whip people into a frenzy and make it seem like ridiculous cases are overloading the court system. How many cases are legitimate that we don't hear a peep about?

Smoke screen like "health care reform"? How many people will still be w/o insurance after HCR?

Well if you side get's any more amendments passed it will be a hell of alot more. ;)

The party w/o any power?

GOP aka your party.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
The real value in tort reform only comes if there are also reforms to reduce "defensive medicine". Defensive medicine lines the pockets of doctors/hospitals, so even without the threat of being sued, it's so ingrained into todays practice that only serious reform will reduce it.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Defensive medicine my ass. One, if it lines their pockets, they will do it anyway. Two, if a test needs to be run to ensure the proper diagnosis as far as a court is concerned, there is nothing unnecessary about it as far as I'm concerned. They are either scamming money or doing their jobs, but neither one has anything to do with frivolous lawsuits or tort reform.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Example of defensive medicine:

I broke a bone in my foot, but it was a hairline fracture. So they did a bone scan to get a better image. But they scanned my whole body...took like 2 hours instead of 15 minutes. Super-expensive machine taking 6 times as long. Why? Because they had been sued by somebody that had cancer and had a bone scan, and they didn't scan the whole body.