Tuesday, January 12, 2010
The Assembly will technically be out of session next week but, following the King Holiday on Monday, will spend Tuesday through Friday in budget hearings (listen for the gnashing of teeth under the Gold Dome that week). The Legislature will return to session January 25th through the 28th (Day 8) but will take off Friday, January 29th. They then will be in session the entire week of February 1 through February 5 (Day 13) and will return on Monday, February 8th for Day 14.
At some point between now and February 8th, they will adopt a resolution setting the schedule beyond that date.
Tomorrow, Governor Perdue will deliver his final State of the State address to a joint session of the House and Senate. Look for heavy emphasis on the budget problems, transportation and water issues.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Today’s Top News:
Today was the first day of the 2010 legislative session. As it is the second year of the two-year term, all bills that progressed to either the House or Senate Rules Committee by the end of last session were automatically returned to their committee of origin.
The top news for this day is that Representative David Ralston (R-Blue Ridge) was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives to replace former Speaker Glenn Richardson who resigned amidst scandal last month.
Tomorrow morning, the Chamber of Commerce will hold its annual “Eggs & Issues” legislative breakfast. That meeting is where new, so-called ‘pro-business’ legislative initiatives historically have been announced
Governor Perdue delivers his State of the State address and his annual budget address this Wednesday.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
What the author of the opinion has proposed is that, instead of allowing victims of medical malpractice the same Constitutional Right to Trial by Jury enjoyed by all other Georgians, people harmed by medical wrongdoing/malpractice would have to get permission to have a jury trial from a “screening panel” comprised of members of the medical and insurance industries, the same industries that want to avoid compensating injured patients. This approach is wrong and adds an unnecessary, ineffective layer to our civil justice system.
The fact is all medical malpractice cases brought in Georgia have already been through multiple screening hoops. The first hoop is that you have to have had something very bad happen as a result of malpractice. Your next hoop is that you have to find a lawyer willing and able to take your case. That lawyer will tell you that there is another, special hoop that protects only professionals charged with negligence. In order to pass through that hoop, the patient must find a medical professional willing to publicly criticize their colleague and sign a document swearing that malpractice happened. So far your case has been screened three times: Something bad happens. You find a lawyer who will invest in helping you find justice. And, you find another doctor who agrees that there was malpractice and is willing to say so. Then there’s a fourth screening before you can have a jury hear your case: the judge must screen the case, too.
Our Founding Fathers created the world's best independent screening panels when they imbedded the right to a trial by jury in our Constitution. You are entitled to a jury of your peers, not a two step process, the first of which is a trial by jury of the defendant's colleagues. We trust the people of our communities to fairly resolve our disputes when we are unable to resolve them ourselves.
The CEO cites an approach tried in Maine as being the right fit for us here in Georgia. He fails to mention that this approach is regularly criticized by the Supreme Court of Maine as being inadequate and harmful to the people of Maine. He cites, as a reason for needing “screening panels,” a Georgia case involving a plastic surgeon who carelessly destroyed the blood supply to a woman’s face and left her horribly disfigured. He suggests that this woman – who was horribly injured through no fault of her own and who successfully navigated all of the legal hurdles to hold the wrongdoer accountable for herself and other patients – has not done enough. He says she needs to clear yet another hurdle to prove herself worthy of a jury trial. The suggestion is outrageous and it serves no purpose but to deny those who have been harmed their fair measure of justice.
Why should patients who have been harmed by medical malpractice have to go through two trials when everyone else only has to go through one? Why should medical professionals get special treatment? It's a question with an obvious answer: They shouldn't.