Tort Reform

WINSTED, Conn. - Who would want to visit a museum dedicated to the seemingly arcane topic of tort law?Indeed, it would be hard to blame the people of this old mill town for seeming a bit skeptical that a proposed museum to honor some of the most reviled professionals in the country - trial lawyers - was a sure-fire way to transform their downtown into a mecca for weekend visitors.But listen to Ralph Nader, this town's most famous native son, as he details his dream of a Museum of American Tort Law."

RECENT news accounts have revealed that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- Washington's largest business lobbying group -- and national Republican Party leaders are about to declare war on trial lawyers.An integral part of the chamber's battle plan is a multimillion-dollar, negative advertising blitz. The GOP leadership plans to launch its own attack. According to a reported Republican source, "We'll unleash an attack on the trial lawyers never seen before."Speaker Newt Gingrich has already informed GOP leaders that attacking trial lawyers is a top priority this election year.

As Sen. Thomas L. Bromwell strode into the Maryland State House for Friday morning's floor session, lobbyists gathered like autograph seekers around a backstage door.A woman from Planned Parenthood met him at the building's entrance with a gentle reminder to push a bill that would protect patient confidentiality. Another lobbyist took him aside to ask why a vote on hiring more Baltimore judges had been delayed. A third just wanted to know why they hadn't talked in a while."Are you mad at me?"

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court agreed yesterday to rule on two new attempts to divert masses of asbestos injury claims away from the courts, raising the hopes of activists who want to curb lawsuits as a way of dealing with society's problems.The court granted review of these controversies:A move to revive a lawyers' settlement deal that would have paid at least $1.3 billion to asbestos victims or their survivors, in return for wiping out thousands of existing lawsuits and blocking many thousands more in the future.

"This isn't good enough." "Let's see something new." "That's not soon enough." "I'm not interested in what we can't do." "People deserve better." "Do it now."These admonitions come from a 1986 campaign handout distributed by then-Mayor William Donald Schaefer, who was running for governor. The sentiments, delivered thousands of times, tell us much about Mr. Schaefer. The drive and determination to succeed, to get workers to do better, to help people, to make life easier for folks NOW have been constant themes throughout his long political career.

Briarcliff Manor, N.Y. -- AS THE HOUSE and Senate work on reconciling their separate proposals to reduce the amount of RTC damages awarded in lawsuits, an unexpected issue has come to the table: sexual politics.The House version would impose limits on punitive awards in all civil cases. The Senate bill is restricted to product-liability suits.President Clinton has criticized both proposals, as have lobbyists for trial lawyers and other interest groups.But among surprising opponents of tort reform are women's rights groups, including the Women's Legal Defense Fund and Democratic women in the House and Senate.

Americans for Tort Reform says a new poll shows that 83 percent of respondents "believe the present liability system has problems and should be improved." Count us in that group. But don't count us among those who support the entire package of Republican bills dealing with product liability and civil litigation now being pushed through the House of Representatives.Some items in this package of bills are not reform, they are more like a wrecking ball.There are large problems with frivolous law suits, though hardly ones so severe they justify some of the barriers to a citizen's day in court that House Republicans want to erect.

The drama that culminated in Zoe Baird's selection as attorney general was demeaning to all the players. By the time Mr. Clinton settled on Ms. Baird, a 40-year-old corporate lawyer from Connecticut, he had managed to create the impression that her main qualifications was her sex.The impression is unfair to Ms. Baird, a formidable lawyer and administrator. And by focusing on her gender while ignoring her ideas, Mr. Clinton has inadvertently chosen an attorney general whose strong views often conflict with his own. On questions such as state sovereignty, tort reform, civil-justice reform and the environment, Ms. Baird's opinions look a lot like those of former Vice President Quayle.

Schmoke's Not Running? What A Relief!So Kurt Schmoke has decided not to run for governor.What a relief!My wife and I were fearful that, having fled the city for the suburbs as it crumbled during his tenure, that we might be forced to move again -- to Pennsylvania.John WoodfieldForest HillRaymond BurrIn your minuscule Sept. 14 obituary on Raymond Burr, you referred to him as "the portly actor." Why did the mean-spirited Sun find it necessary to take such a cheap shot as this to degrade an actor who has brought enjoyment to millions over the years?

The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.-- Dick, to a crowd of citizens seeking to overthrow the king, in Shakespeare's "Henry IV, Part 2" LAWYERS are chronically unpopular, for reasons not hard to fathom. Nobody likes red tape, and red tape is the lawyerly habitat. Moreover, it is the job of lawyers to know the rules better than ordinary citizens. And ordinary citizens suspect, often with good reason, that lawyers use their special knowledge to fleece the laity. As Carl Sandburg put it: "Why does a hearse-horse snicker hauling a lawyer away?"

If there is any message that has come from this summer's town hall meetings throughout the country, it is that the American public is unhappy with how health care reform is being approached by Congress. As the only physician in the Maryland Senate, I know how legislatures approach health care issues. Politicians are usually tone-deaf to those who know the most about the issue - patients and their health care providers. We all want reform - but not the over-reaching measures promoted in the current bills.

Health care reform lies are fairly easy to dispose of. There are no "death panels" in the legislation being considered in Washington, despite continuing insistence to the contrary from people who want to incite fear and draw attention to themselves. More insidious are health care reform myths: seemingly logical arguments that shrink under scrutiny and distract from the real job of controlling dangerously soaring medical expenses. Here are two of the biggest, one from conservatives and the other from liberals.

Conflict of interest blocks tort reform The Sun's article "Governor's supporters cool their heels in Annapolis" (March 2) notes that state Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee Chairman Brian E. Frosh "questioned whether Maryland is really in a medical malpractice crisis." That observation was made by a legislator with an obvious conflict of interest - as a plaintiff's trial lawyer whose law firm conducts medical malpractice lawsuits. For years, Mr. Frosh and Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller have blocked oversight and action by the General Assembly on litigation reform in the medical malpractice insurance crisis that is driving competent, dedicated physicians out of practice.

SLOTS MAY BE on life support for the third straight legislative session since the election of Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., but that isn't preventing some lobbyists and lawmakers from trying to concoct a formula for passage. The latest idea making the rounds is a complicated deal to link some form of medical malpractice reform with a slots package. The thinking is that House Speaker Michael E. Busch would get something he could support (stronger tort reform), while Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller would get his wish (slots)

Sensing that their chance to push for legal changes had arrived, Senate Republicans launched a full debate on the merits of medical malpractice reform yesterday by offering a series of amendments to a more technical bill. "We gave senators an opportunity to vote up and down on individual measures of tort reform," said Sen. Andrew P. Harris, the minority whip from Baltimore County. Each provision offered by Republicans - from allowing insurance companies to spread out payments to victims to tighter caps on pain and suffering awards - was defeated by votes that largely followed party lines.

Special session was a waste of time and money Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. has again shown he doesn't understand his job. Calling the legislature into special session, at a cost of about $50,000 per day, to pass a medical liability "reform" bill that he had written and presented as a fait accompli, is not the way state government runs ("Ehrlich has veto ready for bill," Dec. 31). The emergency session was a waste of time and money. The legislature will be back next week and can consider legislation then.

The Maryland House and Senate were preparing to pass a bill early this morning to keep malpractice insurance costs for doctors in check, defying Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s pledge to veto the complex agreement. Legislative negotiators struck a compromise on the second day of a rare General Assembly special session yesterday that would limit doctors' insurance increases at 5 percent in the coming year, instead of the 33 percent increase that they face Jan. 1. Other agreed-to reforms would make patients safer, discipline negligent doctors and change the way courts award damages for injuries and improper care.

WELL, NOW WE know what happens if you call a special session of the General Assembly without an agreement over the particulars: You get chaos. Three plans to address Maryland's skyrocketing medical malpractice insurance rates floated around Annapolis at various times yesterday -- the governor's, the Senate president's and the House speaker's. How do they differ? We couldn't have put it better than the physicians' lobbyist who called the governor's plan medium on tort reform but underfunded, the Senate's as light on tort reform but well-financed, and the House plan as good on both fronts.

A special session of the General Assembly will begin today with the House of Delegates and Senate debating their versions of medical malpractice reform plans, despite a warning from Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. yesterday that major deviations from the legislation he released last week are unacceptable. A disagreement on key malpractice reform components among Ehrlich, House Speaker Michael E. Busch and Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller is expected to make the first special legislative session in a dozen years a tumultuous affair.

Placed strategically between the soothing Mediterranean scenes in the waiting room of Foris Surgical Group in Frederick are life preservers bearing a discordant message: "Save Our Doctors." Inside each preserver ring is a notice that the practice will close Jan. 1 "due to the overwhelming burden of skyrocketing liability insurance costs." The Maryland doctors are hardly alone in pursuing such tactics to counter rising premiums for malpractice coverage. While many doctors avoid such terms as "job action," physicians around the country are increasingly taking a page out of manuals written by labor organizers and other protest movements.