Early voting for the September 13 Constitutional Referendumpalooza begins today and runs through Tuesday, September 9. Proposition 12, the freedom-limiting and patient-endangering tool of Republican special interests, is the reason why this election is being held on a Saturday in September instead of on Election Day, when Houston’s mayoral race might have raised overall turnout to an undesireable level for its supporters.
Anyway, as you contemplate the long list of amendments that will be up for your approval or rejection, take a moment to read about the poster boy for why medical malpractice insurance rates are what they are. When doctors figure out a way to weed out bad apples like this one, then we can talk about jury awards.
I have mixed feelings about the tort damages cap. I work in the legal field and see lots of deserving people, but tons more overly litigious ones who would not sue if there was a cap on damages. Therefore, I’m torn as to limiting the people who really deserve it, while stopping the people who have abused the system.
I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of how a cap on damages will prevent frivolous lawsuits. A cap puts a limit on the damages of people who have proved their case and shown real harm, which, in my world, is by definition not frivolous.
Caps are a way of shifting the cost of the harm done by a tortfeasor from the negligent party to the innocent party. They are also a way to insure that plaintiffs do not get a full recovery for their economic damages (since they still have to pay their lawyers) and a way to make it uneconomical for people to bring many suits.