Blue Texas: Implications for Pain?

Started by drusso
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
Texas definitely has some pluses like comprehensive tort reform and low Texas ( and now a very pro physician non compete law)

However it has always ranked near the middle of the pack for best places to practice similar to Michigan and Maine which are both blue states.


New York and Hawsii go back and forth claiming the worst crown.
 
But yes of late Abbott introduced a slew of anti physician laws like instructing pediatricians that they cannot refuse to see a patient because of vaccination status.
 
bubaghanush said:
I am mourning Ken Paxton's fight to allow doctors to administer ivermectin at hospitals they don't have privileges at:

www.texastribune.org

Ken Paxton backs ivermectin proponent in Texas Medical Board case

The board that licenses physicians said it will “vigorously” defend itself against the attorney general’s office.
www.texastribune.org www.texastribune.org
Click to expand...
Typical right wing/MAGA response. Ivermectin is a wonder drug do patients have a right to it in any purpose. Dr who doesn't have hospital privileges can even intervene in the patients care for a critical disease.

I would think that even the right leaning docs on this forum would say that this crosses the line but I must admit I am poor at reading the thoughts in this group as a whole.

Also as of last year patients can buy ivermectin at a pharmacy without a prescription and without doctor consultation
 
The TMB is not supposed to be partisan but the president is appointed by the governor. It is very physician friendly but there is no defense for interfering with ICU care in another city with a hospital you don’t have privileges at. Not sure if he will be replaced once Hinojosa takes over, but I’m wondering if Zaafran’s time leading the TMB was limited anyway because conservatives started complaining that he was Muslim.
 
mille125 said:
Typical right wing/MAGA response. Ivermectin is a wonder drug do patients have a right to it in any purpose. Dr who doesn't have hospital privileges can even intervene in the patients care for a critical disease.

I would think that even the right leaning docs on this forum would say that this crosses the line but I must admit I am poor at reading the thoughts in this group as a whole.

Also as of last year patients can buy ivermectin at a pharmacy without a prescription and without doctor consultation
Click to expand...
odd... i took bubaghanush's comments as being sarcastic....
 
mille125 said:
Texas definitely has some pluses like comprehensive tort reform and low Texas ( and now a very pro physician non compete law
Click to expand...

Those are two huge pluses for physicians to practice in Texas. And both are opposed nationally by democratic party and the lawyer lobby of democrats.

Interesting how you're excited about those policies which personally benefit you, but would not exist if Texas had been a blue state during your time working there.

Its the California cliche.
Democratic policies destroy the quality of life in a state. Liberals then move to red states, followed by voting for the same silly liberal ideas which screwed up their quality of life the previous blue state they felt compelled to leave. Rinse and repeat.
 
bedrock said:
Those are two huge pluses for physicians to practice in Texas. And both are opposed nationally by democratic party and the lawyer lobby of democrats.

Interesting how you're excited about those policies which personally benefit you, but would not exist if Texas had been a blue state during your time working there.

Its the California cliche.
Democratic policies destroy the quality of life in a state. Liberals then move to red states, followed by voting for the same silly liberal ideas which screwed up their quality of life the previous blue state they felt compelled to leave. Rinse and repeat.
Click to expand...
Non-competes have been void in California since the 1800s. And then illegal in 2024. Texas narrowly restricts them to 5-miles and 1 year since 9/2025. Hmmm may be our new AG will look into that.
 
mille125 said:
Typical right wing/MAGA response. Ivermectin is a wonder drug do patients have a right to it in any purpose. Dr who doesn't have hospital privileges can even intervene in the patients care for a critical disease.

I would think that even the right leaning docs on this forum would say that this crosses the line but I must admit I am poor at reading the thoughts in this group as a whole.

Also as of last year patients can buy ivermectin at a pharmacy without a prescription and without doctor consultation
Click to expand...
I love it when you lefties miss sarcasm and start attacking each other. Duct does this too. So much arrogance. It’s pure entertainment gold 😂 🤦🏻‍♂️
 
Agast said:
Non-competes have been void in California since the 1800s. And then illegal in 2024. Texas narrowly restricts them to 5-miles and 1 year since 9/2025. Hmmm may be our new AG will look into that.
Click to expand...
I agree. Lets see the democrats achieve tort reform in California, then I'll be impressed

Has any blue state achieved meaningful tort reform to the level of red states, such as the tort reform level in Texas in this century?
I doubt it, but please prove me wrong.
 
callmeanesthesia said:
??
CA has had a non-economic damages cap for decades. It’s actually pretty similar to Texas.
Click to expand...
Historically it was more similar than I expected. That said, the states have diverged significantly over time, likely because Texas stayed red. Meanwhile, California went from red, to purple, to dark blue. Since going deep blue more and more ridiculous legislation has been passed regarding every aspect of life in CA.

For many years both states had a 250K cap on non economic damage. Texas still has a 250K cap on non economic damage for an individual physician.

Meanwhile, in 2026 California has a non economic cap of 470K for non fatal cases and 650K for fatal cases. Currently the non economic cap is roughly twice as high in California compared with Texas but it will soon be far far worse. Your lovely far left governor signed legislation to that effect in 2022. By 2033, the non economic cap in California will be 750K for non fatal case and 1 million for fatal cases. And it will continue to go up every year after that. See the link below for details

MICRA

Are you still happy you voted for a democrat supermajority in California????
 
Last edited:
clubdeac said:
I love it when you lefties miss sarcasm and start attacking each other. Duct does this too. So much arrogance. It’s pure entertainment gold 😂 🤦🏻‍♂️
Click to expand...
Was not attacking him

Was attacking Ken Paxton taking the side of an ivermectin doctor trying to defend a doctor who didn't have privileges at a hospital.

I know it seems unreal...but this really happened.
 
Agast said:
The TMB is not supposed to be partisan but the president is appointed by the governor. It is very physician friendly but there is no defense for interfering with ICU care in another city with a hospital you don’t have privileges at. Not sure if he will be replaced once Hinojosa takes over, but I’m wondering if Zaafran’s time leading the TMB was limited anyway because conservatives started complaining that he was Muslim.
Click to expand...
I am hopeful that the fact that our whole entire Texas government was essentially thrown out will lead to more sensible policies concerning Medicine and Texas physicians.
 
bedrock said:
I agree. Lets see the democrats achieve tort reform in California, then I'll be impressed

Has any blue state achieved meaningful tort reform to the level of red states, such as the tort reform level in Texas in this century?
I doubt it, but please prove me wrong.
Click to expand...
Sir...there is a reason that we have two ears but only one mouth. We should listen and understand before we speak.

Do you even recall that Joe Biden was trying to be the architect of a nationwide ban on non-competes?

Do you ever recall hearing about Biden's executive order in 2021 where he directed the FTC to ban non-compete agreements?

Do you recall the FTC banning non-competes in a final rule removing these agreements from most workers?

You were alive during this time. This was all done by Democrats and a Democratic administration.

But Democrats have no interest in tort reform, right?
 
mille125 said:
Sir...there is a reason that we have two ears but only one mouth. We should listen and understand before we speak.

Do you even recall that Joe Biden was trying to be the architect of a nationwide ban on non-competes?

Do you ever recall hearing about Biden's executive order in 2021 where he directed the FTC to ban non-compete agreements?

Do you recall the FTC banning non-competes in a final rule removing these agreements from most workers?

You were alive during this time. This was all done by Democrats and a Democratic administration.

But Democrats have no interest in tort reform, right?
Click to expand...
Are you blind or did you just gloss over my post just above yours because you can’t admit when you’re wrong?

Firstly, in my last post on this thread before yours I demonstrated the extreme degree to which California democrats as group are in bed with trial lawyers by their recent quadrupling of the non economic limits of California malpractice cases.

Secondly, you’re proving my recurrent point on SDN about Democrats being clueless about the world while simultaneously talking down to everyone who isn’t part of your communist brigade.

Which part of your “two ears or one mouth” failed to understand that tort reform has absolutely nothing to do with non competes?
The part closest to Dunning-Kruger???
 
Last edited:
mille125 said:
On July 9, 2021, President Biden issued his Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. Earlier in the day, the White House issued a press release announcing that the anticipated order would, “[m]ake it easier to change jobs and help raise wages by banning or limiting non-compete agreements and unnecessary, cumbersome occupational licensing requirements that impede economic mobility.”
Click to expand...
Good for Joe Biden, but he tried to achieve this via executive decree, and it requires congressional approval to become law.
Your glorious Democratic Party as a group failed to make this a law despite the democrats having a functional majority (with Harris vote) of both houses of congress at this time.
 
Last edited:
mille125 said:
Typical right wing/MAGA response. Ivermectin is a wonder drug do patients have a right to it in any purpose. Dr who doesn't have hospital privileges can even intervene in the patients care for a critical disease.

I would think that even the right leaning docs on this forum would say that this crosses the line but I must admit I am poor at reading the thoughts in this group as a whole.

Also as of last year patients can buy ivermectin at a pharmacy without a prescription and without doctor consultation
Click to expand...

I never understood the MAGA/deep right fascination with ivermectin.

(Actually before that, it was hydroxychloroquine…as a rheumatologist I never expected to see goddamned Plaquenil become the center of a nationwide frenzy that led to pharmacies running out of it, and insurance companies requiring prior auths for what had been a dirt cheap generic medicine. But then the tides turned, and somehow hydroxychloroquine fell out of favor…)
 
dozitgetchahi said:
I never understood the MAGA/deep right fascination with ivermectin.

(Actually before that, it was hydroxychloroquine…as a rheumatologist I never expected to see goddamned Plaquenil become the center of a nationwide frenzy that led to pharmacies running out of it, and insurance companies requiring prior auths for what had been a dirt cheap generic medicine. But then the tides turned, and somehow hydroxychloroquine fell out of favor…)
Click to expand...
I do. They are m-o-r-o-n-s. It’s pretty simple. There were docs on this board who were adamant about the use of plaquenil. @drusso , @clubdeac
 
mille125 said:
Sir...there is a reason that we have two ears but only one mouth. We should listen and understand before we speak.

Do you even recall that Joe Biden was trying to be the architect of a nationwide ban on non-competes?

Do you ever recall hearing about Biden's executive order in 2021 where he directed the FTC to ban non-compete agreements?

Do you recall the FTC banning non-competes in a final rule removing these agreements from most workers?

You were alive during this time. This was all done by Democrats and a Democratic administration.

But Democrats have no interest in tort reform, right?
Click to expand...
I like the intent, but there are still non competes. So, it didn’t really do anything
 
mille125 said:
On July 9, 2021, President Biden issued his Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. Earlier in the day, the White House issued a press release announcing that the anticipated order would, “[m]ake it easier to change jobs and help raise wages by banning or limiting non-compete agreements and unnecessary, cumbersome occupational licensing requirements that impede economic mobility.”
Click to expand...
Tort refers to protection from frivolous malpractice and personal injury lawsuits, nothing to do with non competes.

The trial bar has always been massively supportive of Democrat politicians and they have never supported meaningful TORT reform at the federal level.
 
hyperalgesia said:
Tort refers to protection from frivolous malpractice and personal injury lawsuits, nothing to do with non competes.

The trial bar has always been massively supportive of Democrat politicians and they have never supported meaningful TORT reform at the federal level.
Click to expand...
The democrats never like it when facts get in the way of their feelings.😂😂😂

However, one of the key features of life under communism is that in that philosophy no one ever admits when they have been conclusively proven to be wrong.

Certainly not comrade Mille125 or comrade ducttape!
 
Last edited:
bedrock said:
Good for Joe Biden, but he tried to achieve this via executive decree, and it requires congressional approval to become law.
Your glorious Democratic Party as a group failed to make this a law despite the democrats having a functional majority (with Harris vote) of both houses of congress at this time.
Click to expand...
I am an independent.
 
dozitgetchahi said:
I never understood the MAGA/deep right fascination with ivermectin.

(Actually before that, it was hydroxychloroquine…as a rheumatologist I never expected to see goddamned Plaquenil become the center of a nationwide frenzy that led to pharmacies running out of it, and insurance companies requiring prior auths for what had been a dirt cheap generic medicine. But then the tides turned, and somehow hydroxychloroquine fell out of favor…)
Click to expand...
They dont believe in science
 
bedrock said:
The democrats never like it when facts get in the way of their feelings.😂😂😂

However, one of the key features of life under communism is that in that philosophy no one ever admits when they have been conclusively proven to be wrong.

Certainly not comrade Mille125 or comrade ducttape!
Click to expand...
I have been wrong in my life many times but in over 20 posts in many different threads, you have yet to prove me wrong in any point but dont let that stop you from trying.

Go back and look. You said...

Those are two huge pluses for physicians to practice in Texas. And both are opposed nationally by democratic party and the lawyer lobby of democrats. You said that in response to me saying the Texas has some good things like low taxes, tort reform and a very pro physician non compete law.

Democrats do not oppose low taxes. Democrats frequently try to reduce tax burden on low to middle class families and support taxes on the ultra wealthy.

Democrats are not oppose to non competes. I demonstrated that above.

Democrats are opposed to tort reform for the most part.

If one accepts your life under communism definition above, one would believe that all Republicans are Communists.
 
mille125 said:
I have been wrong in my life many times but in over 20 posts in many different threads, you have yet to prove me wrong in any point but dont let that stop you from trying.

Go back and look. You said...

Those are two huge pluses for physicians to practice in Texas. And both are opposed nationally by democratic party and the lawyer lobby of democrats. You said that in response to me saying the Texas has some good things like low taxes, tort reform and a very pro physician non compete law.

Democrats do not oppose low taxes. Democrats frequently try to reduce tax burden on low to middle class families and support taxes on the ultra wealthy.

Democrats are not oppose to non competes. I demonstrated that above.

Democrats are opposed to tort reform for the most part.

If one accepts your life under communism definition above, one would believe that all Republicans are Communists.
Click to expand...
I have proven you wrong on many occasions and you respond the same way every time..... by changing the subject.

If you seriously think that I have not proven you wrong a single time in the past month, then you are even more arrogant and more delusional than I thought.

I admit that you were correct that in proving that one democrat Biden didn't oppose non competes under the last administration. However, you don't get to generalize this to your entire party if the democrats, holding a majority in both house of congress at the time, failed to present it to Biden to be made a law.
 
bedrock said:
I have proven you wrong on many occasions and you respond the same way every time..... by changing the subject.

If you seriously think that I have not proven you wrong a single time in the past month, then you are even more arrogant and more delusional than I thought.

I admit that you were correct that in proving that one democrat Biden didn't oppose non competes under the last administration. However, you don't get to generalize this to your entire party if the democrats, holding a majority in both house of congress at the time, failed to present it to Biden to be made a law.
Click to expand...
The Trump admin directed the FTC to abandon fighting for the national noncompete ban.

Traditionally trial lawyers supported democrats and democrats opposed tort reform. But have there been any recent Republican moves for tort reform? A lot of them are lawyers too. I think the Republicans have unfortunately also drifted away from tort reform.
No one is going to stand up for doctors except doctors.
 
bedrock said:
BS. You and ducttape both intermittently claim that independent lable............and then all your other posts prove you're as far left as can be.

What republican candidates for president have you voted for in this century?
Click to expand...
Like most independents, I use my own brain instead of blindly following party lines.

I can't speak for Ducttape but I am a registered independent. Elections are more than just the presidential elections. Even in the latest election which is full of clowns (like Ken Paxton), I voted for 4 Republicans out of about 20 or so on the ballot.

The last twelve years of Republican presidential candidates have been Trump. I voted for him zero times. I voted for Obama both times. So that is 20 years.

My last Republican presidential candidate that I voted for was Bush over Gore.
 
bedrock said:
I have proven you wrong on many occasions and you respond the same way every time..... by changing the subject.

If you seriously think that I have not proven you wrong a single time in the past month, then you are even more arrogant and more delusional than I thought.

I admit that you were correct that in proving that one democrat Biden didn't oppose non competes under the last administration. However, you don't get to generalize this to your entire party if the democrats, holding a majority in both house of congress at the time, failed to present it to Biden to be made a law.
Click to expand...
Wrong..wrong..wrong...

It would have been voted into law by Congress but a Federal Court said that the FTC exceeded its authority. The FTC was given a chance to amend it but instead chose to drop it. That is why it did not become law. It had nothing to do with Congress.
 
callmeanesthesia said:
The Trump admin directed the FTC to abandon fighting for the national noncompete ban.

Traditionally trial lawyers supported democrats and democrats opposed tort reform. But have there been any recent Republican moves for tort reform? A lot of them are lawyers too. I think the Republicans have unfortunately also drifted away from tort reform.
No one is going to stand up for doctors except doctors.
Click to expand...
You’re deflecting just like Mille. I guess you’re also a comrade because as soon as I prove you’re completely wrong about something you try to hide by changing the subject.

I just disproved your last post in this thread and your claim that non economic malpractice damage limits are essentially the same in Texas and CA , by showing you that those malpractice limits are already double in CA vs Tx, soon to be quadruple in CA vs TX and still you can’t admit you’re wrong.

I even linked the official Website of the change in CA malpractice law, not one of the biased studies that duct tries to pass off as facts.

What do I have to do before you guys will ever admit you’ve been proven wrong?
 
callmeanesthesia said:
The Trump admin directed the FTC to abandon fighting for the national noncompete ban.

Traditionally trial lawyers supported democrats and democrats opposed tort reform. But have there been any recent Republican moves for tort reform? A lot of them are lawyers too. I think the Republicans have unfortunately also drifted away from tort reform.
No one is going to stand up for doctors except doctors.
Click to expand...
If a state wants to allow certain non-compete clauses, I don't see why the federal govt should override the will of the people in a state. People need to stop looking straight to the federal govt to solve all their LOCAL problems.

Do you really care if another state where you don't live wants to allow non-competes?

I plugged your top statement into AI and got this:

While the Trump administration abandoned the blanket, market-wide rule, the FTC did not entirely stop policing noncompetes. Instead, it pivoted to a case-by-case enforcement model. [1, 2]
The Republican-led FTC has argued that a blanket ban exceeded the agency's statutory authority. However, they have actively utilized traditional antitrust tools to sue specific companies using "overbroad or abusive" blanket noncompetes, targeting restrictions on low-wage employees while preserving agreements for senior executives. Because no federal ban exists, the legality of traditional noncompetes currently defaults back to a patchwork of state-level laws.
 
bedrock said:
Historically it was more similar than I expected. That said, the states have diverged significantly over time, likely because Texas stayed red. Meanwhile, California went from red, to purple, to dark blue. Since going deep blue more and more ridiculous legislation has been passed regarding every aspect of life in CA.

For many years both states had a 250K cap on non economic damage. Texas still has a 250K cap on non economic damage for an individual physician.

Meanwhile, in 2026 California has a non economic cap of 470K for non fatal cases and 650K for fatal cases. Currently the non economic cap is roughly twice as high in California compared with Texas but it will soon be far far worse. Your lovely far left governor signed legislation to that effect in 2022. By 2033, the non economic cap in California will be 750K for non fatal case and 1 million for fatal cases. And it will continue to go up every year after that. See the link below for details

MICRA

Are you still happy you voted for a democrat supermajority in California????
Click to expand...
Deep red SC here. Our current non-econ damages is 600k. Its indexed to inflation so if we assume 2% per year, it will be $690k in 2033. Interestingly, ours started at 350k when this was put into law in 2004.

Not too far off those damned commies out west...
 
bedrock said:
BS. You and ducttape both intermittently claim that independent lable............and then all your other posts prove you're as far left as can be.

What republican candidates for president have you voted for in this century?
Click to expand...
logical fallacy. his decision or mine to vote for a particular person or party is an ad hominem attack.

go ahead. i know you are dying to say "well, see, he refuses to answer!" which is another ad hominem attack.
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
Deep red SC here. Our current non-econ damages is 600k. Its indexed to inflation so if we assume 2% per year, it will be $690k in 2033. Interestingly, ours started at 350k when this was put into law in 2004.

Not too far off those damned commies out west...
Click to expand...
Weird, it's as if tort reform being passed in one state 20 years ago is not representative of every Republican state in the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.