PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 1, 1993
Medical Malpractice Liability Reform Act of 1993 - Requires any medical malpractice liability claim to be brought within two years following the time when the alleged injury should have reasonably been discovered, but in no event may the action be brought later than four years after the alleged injury occurred. Prohibits any medical malpractice liability action from being brought in any State court unless there has been an initial resolution under an alternative dispute resolution system. Requires a pre-trial settlement conference, before the trial of any medical malpractice liability action, where each party must present a settlement offer. Sets limits on damages and attorney's fees. Provides a defendant charged with negligence a complete defense if the appropriate practice guideline was followed. Amends title XI (General Provisions) of the Social Security Act to set aside funds for practice guidelines. Sets forth requirements for alternative dispute resolution systems.
People & committees
Rep. Johnson, Nancy L. [R-CT-6] · R–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
See H.R.3600.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Consumer Protection and Competitiveness.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic and Commercial Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Referred to the House Committee on Judiciary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1625 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1625 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1625 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1625 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.