Texas Alliance for Patient Access, www.tapa.info

The 2005 legislative session ended where it began, with no improvements made to House Bill 4 and also no erosion of it. The just completed session can be described as a tug of war in which neither side moved the flag.
TAPA opposed the following harmful bills which did not pass:

SB 1401-Emergency Care
SB 1401 (by Senator Rodney Ellis) would have gutted many of the emergency care protections in House Bill 4. Kudos go out to all those who phoned and faxed members of the Senate State Affairs Committee. Special praise is due to the Texas College of Emergency Physicians who came to the Capitol to testify. We had eight emergency care docs and a hospital administrator lined up to speak against the bill May 5.

SB 1190-Early Depositions
SB 1190 (by Senator Jeff Wentworth) was problematic to health care providers for several reasons: First, it would have permitted a plaintiffís attorney to take two depositions prior to the filing of an expert report. This means a named defendant possibly would have implicated himself or herself without hearing the accusation. Or it might have meant a physician might implicate a colleague without prior knowledge of the probable line of questioning. Lastly, the bill would have clearly waived the statute of limitations for physicians or other health care providers if they were named as a responsible third party by a defendant. This bill passed the Senate but died in House Civil Practices.In addition to “filed bills”, TAPA blocked efforts to reduce protection for the peer review process and remove the vendor’s endorsement provision of House Bill 4.

HB 850-Mandatory Disclosure
HB 850 (by State Rep. Betty Brown) would have required that nursing home operators disclose to their residents whether they have professional liability insurance. No other healthcare provider faces a similar requirement. Customarily, if a patient asks if the home has coverage that information is readily disclosed. This bill would have mandated disclosure upon the signing of the admissions form. Customarily, when purchasing a car you're not told "Should a dispute arise we want you to know we have $X dollars worth of liability coverage. Our liability carrier is Y". Yet, that is what is being asked of nursing home operators. Not surprisingly, this bill was favored by the Trial Lawyers Association.

HB 850-Mandatory Disclosure
HB 850 (by State Rep. Betty Brown) would have required that nursing home operators disclose to their residents whether they have professional liability insurance. No other healthcare provider faces a similar requirement. Customarily, if a patient asks if the home has coverage that information is readily disclosed. This bill would have mandated disclosure upon the signing of the admissions form. Customarily, when purchasing a car you're not told "Should a dispute arise we want you to know we have $X dollars worth of liability coverage. Our liability carrier is Y". Yet, that is what is being asked of nursing home operators. Not surprisingly, this bill was favored by the Trial Lawyers Association.

Frankly, the notice requirement in HB 850 was not necessary because professional liability insurance is automatically discoverable in civil litigation. As a practical matter, the parties exchange this information following a demand letter from counsel.

More than likely, the notice requirement in HB 850 would have been used to determine which nursing homes should be targeted for litigation. Nursing home operators have yet to see the competition among insurers and the driving down of rates as is the case in the Texas physician liability market. So, this bill was problematic for nursing homes operators, as well as their medical directors. The bill died in Senate Health & Human Services Committee.

CSSB 890-Settlement Credits
This bill (by Sen. Tommy Williams) took several twists and turns, some potentially harmful to health care providers. A committee substitute that passed the Senate would have caused non-settling defendant health care providers to pay an inappropriately higher amount in damages. The bill would have stripped the bargained election of settlement credits available to health care providers in House Bill 4.

TAPA did not oppose SB 890, as filed, which gave all defense interests the same election of settlement credit options health care interests currently enjoy. However, we did oppose the committee substitute which was contrary to the interests of physicians, hospitals and nursing homes. Ultimately, the bill was passed with language that did not harm healthcare providers.

SB 1216-Hostile Takeover by Probate Court
SB 1216 (by Sen. Juan Hinojosa) would have allowed a probate court judge to take a cause of action pending in another court over the objection of either party and without the consent of the district court judge. To do so posed a potential conflict of interest due to the probate judge's obligation to maximize the recovery of the estate.
The concepts advanced in SB 1216 were defeated by Senators Ratliff and Duncan during the debate on House Bill 4 last session. In addition, the Texas Supreme Court expressly rejected this concept in a ruling announced just two months ago.

HB 2875 (by Rep. Will Hartnett) was the companion bill to SB 1216. HB 2875 passed out of the House Judiciary Committee but was set and knocked off of the Local & Consent Calendar.

In addition to "filed bills", TAPA blocked efforts to reduce protection for the peer review process and remove the vendor's endorsement provision of House Bill 4.