Tort reform ballot initiatives face off in Washington state

Doctors seek a damage cap, and lawyers want a three-strikes rule.

By Mike Norbut, AMNews staff. Oct. 10, 2005.

Washington physicians and trial attorneys are engaged in a battle for votes in a referendum campaign that already has become the most expensive in the state's history.

Each side has its own ballot initiative, advertisements, supportive coalitions and Web sites. The physicians' initiative has already survived a challenge in the state Supreme Court.

The campaigns are trading jabs as well. Physicians say the initiative backed by trial attorneys is nothing more than a retaliatory measure that has no beneficial impact for patients. Trial attorneys, meanwhile, say the physician-backed measure would favor insurance companies over patient rights.

Committees for both sides have raised nearly $9 million collectively, with more expected before the Nov. 8 election.

"There will probably be more than $10 million spent, easily, between both sides combined," said Tom Curry, executive director of the Washington State Medical Assn., which has led the charge on I-330, the referendum backed by physicians, hospitals and nurses across the state.

The stakes are high. Washington physicians are asking voters to enact sweeping tort reform measures, headlined by a $350,000 cap on noneconomic damages in medical liability cases. They hope the package would ease the pressure doctors are feeling from rising insurance premiums.

Washington is one of 20 states the AMA has declared to be in crisis because high liability insurance premiums are forcing doctors to retire early, avoid high-risk procedures or move to a different state. Communities across the state are reporting physician shortages in obstetrics and other high-risk specialties. Even large metropolitan areas have experienced crises in trauma care availability.