No: Insurance industry wins, patients lose with this initiative

  • By Barbara Flye
  • Monday, October 24, 2005 9:00pm
  • Opinion

Initiative 330 is not the right solution for Washington citizens. It will not make patients safer, lower doctors’ insurance rates or rid our courts of frivolous lawsuits. Instead, it will sacrifice citizens’ civil rights to benefit the insurance industry and further harm the most serious victims of medical negligence.

A strong coalition of organizations such as the AARP, the Washington State Nurses Association, Washington State Council of Firefighters, NW Chapter of Paralyzed Veterans, Washington Association of Churches, Washington Citizen Action and many more all say no to I-330 because they agree that it is the wrong solution for the medical malpractice crisis.

What will I-330 do?

I-330 profits the insurance industry, which is why it is heavily backed by insurance companies. The insurance industry has spent $2 million in an effort to pass I-330 – $600,000 of which came directly from Physician’s Insurance, the largest medical malpractice insurer in the state. I-330 does not lower good doctors’ malpractice insurance rates. In fact, the words “insurance rates” aren’t even mentioned in the initiative’s text. You can read it on the Secretary of State’s Web site or you can visit www.TruthInTheFinePrint.org.

The insurance industry has made record profits yet continues to raise rates. A report by the state Office of the Insurance Commissioner released Oct. 4 proves there is no justification for I-330. Paid medical malpractice claims have dropped 13 percent in the last two years while insurance companies in Washington bring in record profits.

Washington voters can learn from mistakes made in other states before it is too late.

During the first 13 years with limits on damage awards, California medical malpractice premiums increased at a rate of 26 percent annually – faster than premiums rose nationally during the same period. It wasn’t until 1988, when voters approved Proposition 103, which enacted the strongest insurance rate regulations in the nation, that doctors’ malpractice premiums decreased.

Texas slammed the courtroom door shut on injured patients in 2003 by passing Proposition 12, and doctors’ rates subsequently increased more than 20 percent, according to data collected by the Medical Liability Monitor. Measures like I-330 do not help our many good doctors.

I-330 forces you to give up your right to your day in court by creating mandatory binding arbitration. I-330 can require patients to sign a waiver before receiving any medical care – for simple activities like filling a prescription, checking a parent into a nursing home or visiting the emergency room. (See I-330, Section 8, Paragraph 2.)

The waiver would not be voluntary. If it were, why would it be included in the text of I-330? Even Jon Peterson, president of the Thurston-Mason Medical Society, was quoted saying he thinks many physicians during the next few years would likely ask patients to sign the waivers – especially doctors who work independently in high-risk specialties such as obstetrics and neurosurgery.

I-330 caps non-economic damages at $350,000 – not $1 million as pro I-330 ads deceptively claim. The state Attorney General’s Office agrees that there are no exceptions to this $350,000 cap for any case of true medical negligence.

There is a big difference between the ballot description of I-330 and the actual initiative – which contains 20 pages of fine print. Careful reading of the initiative shows that there are absolutely no exceptions to the cap in I-330. No matter how egregious the negligence or how severe the injury – the $350,000 cap still applies. (See I-330, Section 2, Paragraph 1.)

This cap is unfair to stay-at-home mothers, seniors and children, who often have little or no economic loss. Because they receive no compensation for loss of wages, they rely on non-economic damages to support themselves.

I-330 abolishes a patient’s right to seek compensation for damages that result when managed-care carriers withhold or deny appropriate care – the heart of Washington’s Patient’s Bill of Rights. Ironically, many of the same organizations that supported this bill in 2000 now support I-330 and seek to limit its power, including the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Hospital Association and the Washington Academy of Family Physicians.

Vote no on I-330. Don’t let the insurance industry take away your rights.

Barbara Flye is campaign chair of the No on I-330 Campaign, a co-author of the Washington Patient’s Bill of Rights and former executive director of Washington Citizen Action, the largest consumer advocacy organization in the state.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, Nov. 12

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Canceled flights on a flight boards at Chicago O’Hare International Airport in Chicago, on Friday, Nov. 7, 2025. Major airports appeared to be working largely as normal on Friday morning as a wave of flight cancellations hit the U.S. (Jamie Kelter Davis/The New York Times)
Editorial: With deal or trust, Congress must restart government

With the shutdown’s pain growing with each day, both parties must find a path to reopen government.

Welch: Taking the initiative for parents and fair play

Two proposed state ballot measures would strengthen parents’ rights and protect girls’ sports.

Comment: Here’s what ‘losing’ shutdown looks like for Democrats

They didn’t get an ACA deal, but they kept the economic message, leaving the GOP to answer for health care costs.

Saunders: Trump has himself to blame for Newsom’s Prop. 50 win

The president’s thirst for more GOP House seats sparked a backlash that Newsom can ride to 2028.

Comment: Supreme Court’s silence on gay marriage speaks volumes

Dobbs removed a block in the Jenga tower of ‘substantive due rights.’ The same-sex marriage block appears safe.

French: The podcast that surrendered the GOP to its fate

Actually, it’s the ideological split following Tucker Carlson’s interview of Nick Fuentes that sealed it.

Klein: Democrats had the upper hand. Why did they give in now?

Trump has a higher tolerance for others’ pain than Democrats do. And they made their point with voters.

Recalling the bravery of nation’s first veterans

In the year 1768 there were a lot of Americans involved with… Continue reading

Praise for both candidates in County Council race

Sam Low earned my vote for Snohomish County Council Position 5 because… Continue reading

So much ‘winning’ in Trump’s first eight months

So. Eight months into the second Trump administration, the government has been… Continue reading

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.