On the recordJuly 7, 2003
I hope the Senator also agrees with me that we ought to allow some exceptions to the cap. I don't want to put words in his mouth. But that is what I think. I think those exceptions should be allowed. I would also say it is important to remember if there has been any containment of malpractice premiums in California, they also followed Proposition 103 which is insurance reform. It is not just the limitation on malpractice law that California has, but they passed insurance reform. After that reform, we saw some changes in the amount that was charged to physicians. The last point I want to make is this: There has been talk that if we don't do something about malpractice insurance, some doctors are forced to leave the State in which they are practicing. I don't doubt that is a fact. I have spoken to doctors in Illinois in specialties in certain areas who are seriously considering leaving. I hope they don't have to. I hope we can do something here to avoid it. But the fact is, in California there are indicators of significant physician dissatisfaction with medical malpractice, and they have the caps. There appears to be widespread problems recruiting physicians. Only a third of California physicians would still choose to practice in California, if they had to do it over today. To suggest that this is all about malpractice premiums and whether you have a cap on how much victims of malpractice can recover, the California experience does not necessarily prove that.
Source
govinfo.gov




