Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-Cost, Timely Healthcare (Health) Act of 2004

HELP EFFICIENT, ACCESSIBLE, LOW-COST, TIMELY HEALTHCARE (HEALTH) ACT OF 2004 -- (House of Representatives - May 12, 2004)

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 638, I call up the bill (H.R. 4280) to improve patient access to health care services and provide improved medical care by reducing the excessive burden the liability system places on the health care delivery system, and ask for its immediate consideration.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, every so often in this body, I think it is important to talk about facts. Instead of legislating by an anecdote, I would like to actually look at some facts today.

Those on the other side would have us believe that limiting patients' access to the courts will relieve high malpractice insurance premiums. But the fact is there has been no increase in the rate of malpractice claims filed in recent years, and the fact is the average payout has remained steady for a decade. The fact is that California, the State that has been most successful in curbing malpractice costs, only did so after passing a voter initiative that also reformed the insurance system.

Despite this evidence, proponents of this bill continue to represent it as relief for physicians. In reality, it is a bald effort by the insurance industry to pass off their costs on already suffering patients. This bill will disproportionately affect women, low-income individuals, and children because the caps on noneconomic damages will affect them. Since they do not make a lot of money, they will not have a lot of economic damages to be awarded by the courts.

Real people will suffer a second injustice under this legislation, people like Heather Lewinski, who came before our committee and testified, a 17-year-old girl who suffered permanent facial disfigurement at the hands of a plastic surgeon who lied to her and her family. And this young woman came before us and said her greatest fear was she would never have a date. People like Linda McDougal. This is Linda McDougal in this poster right here. Linda McDougal's breasts were amputated after she had been misdiagnosed with cancer, and here she is today. She was completely fine. And the family of Jesica Santillan, a little girl who died because the hospital failed to ensure that the heart and lungs she was about to receive would be compatible with her blood type. Her family will be denied just compensation for her suffering.

If we really wanted to fix the crisis that is plaguing our Nation's doctors, we should take a good look at the insurance industries, as we heard from my colleague from Ohio. Instead, we are considering a bill that is akin to curing a headache by amputating an arm. Arbitrarily limiting patients' rights is not fair, and it will not solve the problem.

Let me talk for a minute about some of the anecdotes upon which we are basing this legislation. We heard that obstetrics wards were closing down because of liability insurance premiums. The example given by the AMA said that Pennsylvania's Jefferson Health System closed its obstetrics ward because of this reason, but 2 years later this obstetrics ward is still up and running and accepting new patients. In May, 2003, the AMA said that a group of 10 neurosurgeons in Washington State had been dropped by their malpractice insurer. As of 2004, the group is doing just fine and taking new patients.
Finally, in January 2004, just a few months ago, President Bush said there was a doctor in Arkansas who stopped delivering babies because of rising insurance costs. That turned out to be completely untrue.

If there is a problem here, let us let the States fix it. Let us not put it on people like Linda McDougal.