If Anti-Tort Reform Can Go Through Ways and Means…

Below we note a Heritage Foundation column on the attempt to turn Medicare Secondary Payer statutes into a catch-all law permitting lawsuits for this, that and the other thing, i.e., a vast expansion of prospective liability that trial lawyers would seek to cash in on.

The language was added and then dropped from H.R. 3200, the health care bill, during its consideration by the House Ways and Means Committee.

But wait. Covering the hullabaloo town hall sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) last week, The New York Times reported this:

Mr. Moran then apologized to the man whose identity he had questioned and added his 2 cents about why tort reform was not part of any bill. He said if it were, such a bill would have to go through the judiciary committee, which he said was one of the most partisan in Congress and would never have reported it out.

But if the Medicare Secondary Payer amendment — a measure meant to expand liability — could go through Ways and Means, why can’t language meant to limit liability also go through that committee?

Leave a Reply