Legislators in this last session sought a way to cut health care costs by reducing medical malpractice lawsuits. The vehicle they settled on, a statutory “early offer” program that would provide injured patients with relatively quick out-of-court settlements, is too flawed to become law.

Senate Bill 406 began as a decent concept. Injured patients who wanted to avoid court could agree to accept an “early offer” from a medical provider. The idea was that injured parties would win by getting a guaranteed payout and avoiding costly and lengthy trials, medical providers would win by having the option of making an up-front payment that would cost much less than a trial and jury-ordered payment, and consumers would win because medical malpractice insurance costs would drop, thus lowering health care costs.

Instead, SB 406 turned out to be a trap from which injured patients who did not have legal counsel might inadvertently wander, and from which they would then be prohibited from escaping.

The bill tilts the playing field heavily in favor of hospitals and physicians. Patients who opt for the early offer and get lowballed by a medical provider could reject the offer and sue. But if they do, they would be required to post a bond sufficient to cover the provider’s expected legal fees. Who has that kind of money lying around? If a patient goes to court and loses — or wins, but the jury awards less than 125 percent of the early offer — the patient would have to pay the provider’s legal fees. There is no provision requiring providers to pay the legal fees of a patient who prevails in court.

The bill sets absurdly low caps on penalty payments for medical providers. For “a permanent injury involving grave harm, or an injury resulting in death,” the penalty is $140,000 on top of economic damages.

In a column on the opposite page, attorney Chuck Douglas highlights other flaws in the bill. Gov. Lynch was right that this bill was well-intentioned but fatally flawed. The Legislature should uphold his veto.