In Tallahassee, the battle over medical malpractice has been cast as the fight of the century, with Jeb Bush drawing blood from members of his own party.
But beyond the capital, the combat takes place at a remove that is not just geographical.
We have heard about the doctors. They want what Bush wants, a quarter-million-dollar limit on pain-and-suffering payouts in malpractice settlements.
We have heard about the lawyers. They want no cap.
But what about the rest of us?
What do we get out of all the jockeying, the politicking, the endless special legislative sessions?
Nobody has suggested that if Bush gets his way, there will be a benefit directly to you or me.
For that unfortunate handful of people who suffer the terrible losses that are the result of malpractice, there would be less to make up for what they've endured.
As for the rest of us, the benefits are cloudy indeed.
Maybe doctors' insurance premiums will go down.
We're talking insurance rates here.
If you own a home or a car in this state, then you know some of what the doctors know.
Insurance rates go up without warning. The company that raises your premiums dictates the terms of your family budget.
When the premiums increase, affording the house or the car can suddenly become a new and scary question.
And what's worse than your health insurance, assuming, of course, you have any that's affordable?
The premium goes up yearly, while doctors and hospitals get paid less for their services, and you're stuck trying to manage your finances.
And the worst crisis is over medical malpractice?
"We need to fix the insurance problem," says Bill Newton, executive director of the Florida Consumer Action Network in Tampa.
"All lines are going up. It just happens that the groups there (in Tallahassee) are screaming a lot louder."
I sought him out because I was looking for somebody who represented the ordinary consumer in this dispute. FCAN should fit the bill, I figured, because it is a statewide consumer group.
But Newton admits FCAN sides with the lawyers in the malpractice debate. The consumer group has received a $25,000 contribution from an association of lawyers opposed to the malpractice cap.
Yet what Newton says is so obvious.
Other measures could be taken to cut back on the problems posed by bad doctors. According to figures compiled by another consumer group, Public Citizen, just 6 percent of the state's doctors are responsible for more than half of the malpractice payments. If we made sure they got put out of business, you would certainly cut back on costs.
The state could try to ride herd on the big insurance companies that have Florida at its knees.
Again, according to Public Citizen, last year homeowners insurance typically rose 15 percent; health insurance, around 24 percent; while malpractice insurance rose 26 percent.
So which crisis do we tackle first?
The answer ought to be determined by who is in greatest need, who is suffering the most. But it's not. This is largely a battle among the rich. Not our battle.
We're stuck with the rest of the insurance problem.
I would not recommend holding your breath until Tallahassee declares it the state's No. 1 crisis.
