David Thomas: “the amendment that was just passed puts a limit on the amount that can be received in terms of damages. One side of the…”

“the amendment that was just passed puts a limit on the amount that can be received in terms of damages. One side of the equation has been adjusted properly. Notwithstanding the fact you can seek damages, there is a limit. This amendment proposes to create balance, put a limit on the other side of the equation. What you see here is a quote from a letter from the American College of Surgeons to the President of the United States on February 7. It says: If the Congress seriously entertains caps on punitive and noneconomic damages--we have just done that--we believe it would be difficult if not impossible to explain why Federal policymakers did not at the same time address the liability exposure faced by physicians, hospitals and other health care practitioners. It would be unfair, the College of Surgeons said, to enact a patients' bill of rights that caps damages for suits against health plans without capping damages for suits brought against physicians and other health care providers. This is exactly what this amendment does. It does not intrude on any State that has in place its own desired medical malpractice structure, but where there is none, this amendment will provide one unless and until the State passes its own and the State's prerogative would then prevail. It is simply an opportunity to provide a degree of uniformity where there is none today.”