SANTA FE — A New Mexico House committee on Monday advanced a major overhaul of the state’s medical malpractice laws, a bipartisan effort intended to stem the tide of healthcare providers leaving the state.
House Bill 99, which passed the Health and Human Services Committee in a 7-3 vote, seeks to cap punitive damages and streamline legal proceedings. However, the bill’s progress was marked by a sharp divide over a late amendment that removes liability protections for large, out-of-state hospital corporations.
The bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, said the legislation is a response to a healthcare environment that has placed New Mexico at a “competitive disadvantage” compared to neighbors like Colorado. Chandler noted that the state is currently “out of alignment” with how other blue states address malpractice, leading to a “real and perceived doctor shortage.”
Providers Describe a System in Crisis
During hours of testimony, medical professionals urged the committee to pass the reforms, describing an environment where the threat of litigation is as damaging as the financial cost.
Dr. Brooke Baker, a physician and attorney, testified that 73% of physicians involved in litigation show signs of “medical malpractice stress syndrome,” including insomnia and feelings of worthlessness. Baker noted that in New Mexico, punitive damages are pled in roughly 90% of cases at the outset.
“The specter of punitive damages, while they’re trying to figure out how they’re going to defend themselves… is something that physicians are going to be very hard-pressed not to pay attention to,” Baker said.
Dr. Bernardo, chief medical officer at Presbyterian Española Hospital, highlighted the direct trade-off between legal costs and patient care. He testified that his hospital incurred an additional $3.7 million in malpractice expenses in 2025 alone.
“To put that in perspective, we’ve been working to get an in-house MRI for approximately 15 years. That cost is $3 million,” Bernardo said. “Rising malpractice costs directly compete with investments that service our patients.”
Other specialists warned of a total system collapse. Dr. James Bassante, an addiction medicine specialist, said his malpractice insurance carrier recently notified him it would no longer offer policies in New Mexico. “This plunged my company, which offers almost 200 addiction treatment beds across the state, into a financial unknown,” Bassante said.
The “Corporate” Amendment Friction
The debate shifted when Committee Chair Elizabeth Thomson, D-Albuquerque, introduced an amendment to exclude “hospital systems”—defined as groups of two or more hospitals controlled by the same entity—from the new punitive damage caps.
Thomson argued that multi-billion dollar corporations should not receive the same protections as individual doctors or small, locally owned clinics. “We want to tell these huge national corporations that they cannot cut corners on medical care and leave people damaged,” Thomson said.
The amendment was met with immediate resistance from the bill’s co-sponsors. Rep. Alan Martinez, R-Bernalillo, argued the change “poisoned” the bipartisan effort, while others noted that 80% of the state’s doctors are employed by the very systems the amendment targets.
The bill now moves to the House Judiciary Committee, but its bipartisan support appears fractured. House Minority Leader Gail Armstrong, R-Magdalena, expressed deep frustration with the changes made to the original compromise.
“I will not keep my name on this bill if it becomes a bandaid,” Armstrong said.
