Meanwhile, you’ve managed to respond to my accusation that you’re misrepresenting Obama’s plan by… misrepresenting Obama’s plan. Where in MEDiC does is say doctors will have “walk lock-step in concert with Comparative Effectiveness Research”? (And what’s so bad about insisting doctor’s follow the science, anyway?)

There are good reasons why tort reform is not in the bills in Congress – see, for example, Tim Foley’s post at Change.org. President Obama can’t insist that Congress include tort reform in those bills – but the fact that he’s willing to use his regulatory authority through HHS to work on the problem shows at least some interest in addressing the problem.

As Clinton and Obama’s piece states: “We realize that the implementation of the MEDiC model will not come without effort. A safe and appropriately confidential environment must be created that allows open communication between physicians and patients about adverse outcomes. Initially, medical-error transparency may be difficult to foster.”

Any reform that does not address the issue of caps on liability judgements is a disingenuous attempt at real liability reform and will do nothing to deter the practice of defensive medicine. In his speech last night, then, the President has only reaffirmed his prior discussions on this subject and offered nothing new, including the requirement for doctors to walk lock-step in concert with Comparative Effectiveness Research to avoid liability judgements against them while still being subject to potentially monstrous settlements.

The President, despite his rhetoric, really does NOT seem ready to negotiate on this critical and very sensive aspect of liability reform.