A controversial medical arbitration bill is on its way to the House after senators gave their final approval in a 22-5 vote on Wednesday afternoon, but only after the Senate reversed its earlier position that one arbitrator was better than three to resolve medical disputes.
As it did in its original format, SB245 now calls for a three-member arbitration panel: one to be chosen by the patient (likely a lawyer), one by the doctor (likely a doctor) and the third chosen by the other two arbitrators.
"It doesn't matter if it is one of three," said Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, pointing out that the ultimate decision will be made by the one arbitrator chosen by the representatives of the two disputing sides. And all that means is additional costs, he said.
Sen. Parley Hellewell, R-Provo, was also uncomfortable with the bill.
"With three arbitrators, it guarantees that IHC (Intermountain Health Care) wins every single time," he said.
But in the end, one of the most contentious issues on Capitol Hill passed with scarcely a whimper.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Leonard Blackham, R-Moroni, said the medical community has made "major concessions" by giving up mandatory arbitration and the ability to refuse service if patients decline to sign an arbitration agreement.
The bill is the result of public outcry over IHC requiring patients to agree to arbitration or be denied services. If SB245 became law, those who signed the agreements could have them rescinded.
What is not open to negotiation, he stressed, is giving up a three-member panel to resolve disputes. When the bill was amended Monday to have a single arbitrator, Blackham threatened to amend his own bill to cap attorneys' fees under a formula that made it so the higher the dollar award, the lower the percentage an attorney would receive.
The practical effect would be to discourage attorneys from pursuing high-dollar medical malpractice claims that drag out for years and, conversely, encourage litigants to settle cases more quickly because less money would make it into their attorneys' pockets.
Sen. Ed Mayne, D-West Valley, predicted lawmakers will be back next year dealing with the same issue because of all the confusion among the public.
"And anyone who doesn't think three arbitrators isn't going to cost more money, I've got some things to sell you," he said.
E-mail: spang@desnews.com