Proposed Federal medical malpractice reforms are dead (again) and so I'll stop talking about them soon. Not just yet, though.
Interestingly, Nevadans played a major role in the rise and fall of the legislation. John Ensign, R-Nev., sponsered part of the legislation, while Harry Reid, D-Nev., opposed it.
Bloomberg News reported that Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada called the attempt by Republicans to bring up the measures an election-year "political stunt" to curry favor with insurance companies. "There is a health-care crisis, but it has nothing to do with tort laws," Reid said. "The real problem is too much malpractice, not too much litigation."
The American Trial Lawyer's Association published some interesting statistics about the legislation from a variety of sources:
$250,000: Maximum value, under S. 23, of the life of a woman killed by cervical cancer her OB/GYN failed to diagnose.
Unlimited: Maximum value, under S. 23, of the life of a man killed by prostate cancer his urologist failed to diagnose.
1: Number of female sponsors of S. 23.
61.6 Million: Number of women of childbearing age whose rights would be denied and lives devalued by S. 23.
24.8%: Percent increase in number of OB/GYNs in United States since 1990.