New Mexico

New Mexico lawmakers clashed Tuesday over two controversial presentations at the Legislative Health and Human Services Committee, one claiming malpractice reforms have little effect on the state’s doctor shortage and another portraying private investment in healthcare as a threat. Both drew sharp rebukes from Republican legislators who said the data presented was misleading, outdated, and rooted more in ideology than fact.

Northwestern University law professor Bernard Black, who identified himself as an “equal-opportunity annoyer,” quickly lived up to the title when he told lawmakers that New Mexico is “gradually accumulating more physicians per capita” and that caps on malpractice damages have “minimal impact” on the physician supply. His claims immediately drew bipartisan criticism. Sen. Nicole Tobiassen (R-Albuquerque) said his statistics were “so far off the charts” it was hard to take them seriously. 

“Your data sets are so old that many of us in this room were probably using half a can of Aqua Net a day,” she said, noting that Black admitted at times he didn’t know what was happening in New Mexico. Fighting back tears, she told him, “I’ve had to fly my husband out of this state to save his life. You have no clue how many New Mexicans can’t get to a hospital, how many delay care for months or years because they can’t get to a doctor. I’m offended on behalf of every New Mexican that is suffering or dying.”

Even Democratic Sen. Martin Hickey, a retired physician, said the data “failed the smell test,” arguing that New Mexico is “the only state to lose doctors” while Black’s dataset relied heavily on voluntary surveys from the American Medical Association that capture only a small portion of physicians. Hickey said he was “stunned” by the conclusions and emphasized that “if you try to get an appointment, you can’t — and it’s only getting worse.”

Republicans stressed that the crisis worsened after the 2021 and 2023 changes to the state’s Medical Malpractice Act, when Democrat lawmakers raised the cap on hospital damages from $600,000 to $5.5 million, an amount set to rise again in 2026. Small clinics were initially held to the same high cap until it was partially rolled back two years later. 

Providers say the new system sent insurance premiums skyrocketing and drove doctors out of practice. The New Mexico Medical Society and allied groups have reported a loss of 248 physicians in the last five years, and nearly 40 percent of the state’s remaining doctors are 60 or older and expected to retire by 2030.

After the hearing, three Republican senators issued a joint statement denouncing what they called “blatant bias” in the committee’s witness selection. “Progressive Democrats such as Liz Thomson would rather shield trial attorneys with lies and misinformation than truly represent the needs of everyday New Mexicans who are begging for commonsense solutions to improve their access to quality healthcare,” they said. 

The senators also criticized Thomson for inviting “a disbarred lawyer and controversial professor such as Bernard Black,” saying it proved their point about partisanship on the committee.

The criticism did little to change the tone of the meeting. Later, the committee heard another presentation—this time from Olivia Kosloff of the American Economic Liberties Project, a left-leaning advocacy group known for opposing private investment in nearly every sector of the economy. Kosloff claimed private equity ownership of hospitals and nursing homes “extracts value rather than creates it,” citing unverified statistics from activist sources like the Private Equity Stakeholder Project that portrayed New Mexico as having the highest proportion of healthcare facilities “owned” by private equity. She alleged that such ownership leads to worse patient outcomes and higher mortality, despite admitting that many studies were limited and unable to establish causation.

Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo) challenged the claims as “ideological, not empirical,” noting that the data ignored how most hospitals acquired by private investors were already in financial distress before acquisition. “Rural hospitals across the country have survived because investors provide capital for payroll, technology, and debt restructuring — not because of Washington grants,” Block said. “Private equity isn’t the enemy of healthcare; it’s often the last lifeline.” 

He cited independent analyses, including a 2022 Health Affairs study showing that private-equity-backed hospitals were less likely to close than comparable independents, and reports from PitchBook and Kaufman Hall indicating that such ownership accounts for less than five percent of hospitals nationwide with outcomes comparable or better than other for-profits.

When Block tried to explain these points, Chair Thomson attempted to cut him off before his allotted time expired, prompting him to call a point of order to have the clock reset. He went on to warn that proposed restrictions, such as bans on the corporate practice of medicine and expanded oversight of hospital acquisitions, would only “kill access to capital for rural and community hospitals that desperately need investment.” He added, “Demonizing investment may score political points, but it won’t save a single rural emergency room.”

Republicans say both presentations reflect a troubling pattern in the committee, where ideological narratives are given precedence over firsthand testimony from practicing doctors and local providers. As the state’s healthcare crisis deepens, they argue that Democrats are deflecting blame from their own policy failures — ballooning malpractice caps, red tape, and hostility toward private enterprise — that have made New Mexico one of the hardest places in the country to practice medicine. 

With the next legislative session looming, lawmakers are expected to revisit malpractice reform and broader healthcare access, and Republicans say it’s long past time the debate be grounded in reality rather than political theater.