A bill aimed at limiting medical-malpractice lawsuit awards passed in the State Assembly Tuesday.

The legislation, which would cap the dollar amount of non-economic, or pain and suffering, damage compensation at $450,000 for adults and $550,000 for minors, was approved by a 64-30 vote.

Though there had been a law in the state requiring non-economic damages not to exceed $445,755, the Wisconsin Supreme Court earlier this year determined the cap was unconstitutional due to its arbitrariness. This bill would reinstate the law, but at a slightly higher amount, with the two-tiered award value based on the age of the malpractice victim.

Proponents of the cap argue it is essential to keep a high quality of health care in the state.

"It is crucial that the caps be restored quickly to make sure that Wisconsin remains one of the best places in the nation for doctors and patients," Assembly Speaker John Gard, R-Peshtigo, a co-sponsor of the bill, said in a statement.

The medical-malpractice cap does not apply to awards for economic compensation, which are not regulated by the state.

Gard communications director Bob Delaporte said the cap will especially benefit Wisconsin's rural citizens because some medical facilities in lesser-populated areas have been forced to shut down due to overwhelming malpractice insurance. The enactment of a new malpractice cap should lower malpractice insurance and allow all medical facilities in the state to remain in business, he added.

"We need to make sure people can get doctors they need and the health care they need in all areas of the state," Delaporte said.

Both the Wisconsin Hospital Association and the Wisconsin Medical Society applauded the effort to limit malpractice non-economic damage awards.

"This is a tremendous step towards restoring balance to our medical-liability system and assuring access to hospitals and doctors across Wisconsin," WHA President Steve Brenton said.

The previous cap, which started at $350,000, had a stipulation allowing the award value to increase annually with inflation and cost of living. The new bill would institute a limit which will not have such regular adjustments, though the amount would be reviewed each biennium by a committee.

Those opposing the bill say the dollar amount of the cap is still arbitrary and is too similar to the limit found unconstitutional.

"My main concern is for the victims of malpractice," Rep. Gary Hebl, D-Sun Prairie, one of the 30 Democrats to vote against the bill, said. "They are the ones we really should be talking about."

Hebl added the cap on non-economic damages should be based on "quantifiable figures" fair to the victims.

"My belief is that the new cap that was proposed is so close to what was struck down by the Supreme Court that we are wasting our time," Hebl said, adding the state's high court would likely rule against the new limit as well.

Delaporte disagreed, stating the bill had new considerations worked into it.

"These new caps are really put forth in a way so that there's some logic behind them. We looked at what other states do, and we looked at a 'tipping point' where caps get too high," Delaporte said. "It should be pretty effective, and we believe it is constitutional."

Though the bill's supporters said the bill will help curb medical costs and keep health-insurance premiums low because doctors will not be gouged by skyrocketing malpractice-insurance rates, Hebl said such logic is unfounded.

"[Wisconsin doctors] have the lowest malpractice-insurance premiums in the country," Hebl said. "Yet we have the second-highest cost for health care in the country. So the argument that we need these caps to keep down health care costs is totally unsubstantiated."

Hebl said keeping quality doctors and health-care workers in Wisconsin is a top priority and added the new cap legislation needs to be reformulated to fit a compromise.

"The governor indicated he would most likely veto [this bill]," Hebl said. "What I'd like to do is, as a Democrat, work with the Republicans and with the governor to come up with a bill that passes the constitutionality test."

Despite this, Delaporte said, it is likely the State Senate will also approve the bill and usher it to Gov. Jim Doyle's desk to await either a signature or a veto.

However, Delaporte said the vote achieved Tuesday was "veto-proof" because more than two-thirds of state representatives favored the bill, which would grant the Assembly enough leverage to override the veto.