The problem is that the system is so far beyond punishing those who commit true negligence, and instead simply punishes bad outcomes, that it is profoundly unjust, and causes dangerous adaptations in practice that cause harm to patients (unnecessary tests and treatments). No one that I've heard wants "a blank check to commit negligence". I think we would all settle for a system that punishes true negligence. However, we don't accept a system that uses the prop of "negligence" as an excuse to extort money out of any and every physician, even the best amongst us, practically at random, simply because a patient has a bad outcome and a jury can be confused by sham "experts" whose testimony is bought and paid for.
Even if as a physician you are never sued (unlikely), over your career hundreds of thousands (or more) dollars that would have been available to pay you, will go towards malpractice insurance. That's money either indirectly, or directly taken out of your paycheck.
Just today, I was talking to a family physician (a very "low risk" specialty) in his 50's. He said he'd been sued four times in his career already and won each case, but not before being accused of negligence, having to miss work for depositions, having to be cross-examined in a court room multiple times and put on trial. This is in a "tort reform" state, and he's a super nice guy that does not p--s off patients. Is he supposed to just shrug this off and practice the same as before he was sued 4 times for negligence he never committed? He'd be a fool.
Is it justice to be falsely accused of negligence routinely, and have to be put on trial over and over again, to proves one's innocence?
No. What it is, is just plain wrong, and it should be illegal.