California Voters Vote “No” on Proposition 46
California voters voted “no” on proposition 46 last night. The proposition would have required drug testing of doctors, required a statewide prescription database before prescribing controlled substances, and increased the $250,000 pain and suffering cap in medical negligence lawsuits to $1.1 million. The medical negligence lawsuit cap would also be adjusted annually for future inflation. According to the California voter guide, state and local government costs from raising the cap on medical malpractice damages would range from tens of millions to several hundred millions of dollars annually, “offset to some extent by the savings from requirements on health care providers.”
Proponents of the proposition argued that increasing the cap on pain and suffering damages would decrease medical negligence, which accounts for the country’s third largest cause of death, by making “negligent doctors accountable.” Additionally, proponents have argued that the current $250,000 limit on non-economic awards makes it difficult for lawyers to take on many medical malpractice cases because the cases are economically unfeasible.
Opponents of the proposition, on the other hand, argued that trusted doctors and specialists would be “forced to leave California” to move to states with “more affordable medical liability insurance.” Additionally, opponents argued that the proposition could potentially raise healthcare costs for healthcare consumers, though proponents argue that the proposition would actually save money because, among other things, testing doctors for drug impairment could prevent costly medical errors.
Whether the voters’ ultimate rejection of proposition 46 will be to voters’ benefit in the future will have to be seen.
