Health Care Reform

Floor Speech

Date: Oct. 22, 2009
Location: Washington, DC

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I am happy to jump in. Last weekend, I was over in central Oregon--in Bend--and I was reading local clips. One of the articles that came across was about a lawsuit that had been filed. The article said that a year before an individual had passed away because they had repeatedly asked for an MRI to address a pain he had in his back. It turned out to be a tumor, and it killed the individual. But they could never get the MRI approved. The doctor requested it, but it wasn't approved. Another doctor requested it--a consulting doctor--and it wasn't approved. Eventually, the tumor was beyond the point of being able to be operated on. The individual passed away.

That article talked about a second parallel situation that is unfolding right now. The individual is still alive but also is seeking an MRI and is being turned down by the same company. I thought, that is how an insurance company makes those profits--by turning down requests for coverage. Hopefully, it doesn't come to the point that a diagnostic exam is denied to the degree that someone is going to die, but it happens. It happened in this particular case.

The motivating factor of the management of the company was to maximize profit, not to maximize healing. The Senator from Rhode Island served as insurance commissioner. I am sure he saw examples of this. If I heard him right, he is saying that in a public option the motivation is healing, not profit, and therefore has a long-term perspective. Therefore, it can invest in prevention, in disease management. A private company will not assume that its customer, the policyholder, will still be a customer in 10, 15 years. They take a short-term perspective. That is to minimize the amount you spend on health care. But the longer term perspective would be much better for the quality of life of our citizens, and certainly investment in prevention and disease management might have tremendous rewards in bending the cost curve.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MERKLEY. So not only do we have little competition because there are many markets with only a couple of companies providing services, but because of the antitrust provisions, those companies are allowed to talk to each other, to collaborate on what rates they charge or what deals they make with providers, further reducing competition, even when there are a couple companies in the market.

If we take and flip this notion of competition and look at it through the eyes of the individual working American, then what it becomes is choice. Lack of competition in the marketplace equals lack of choice for individual Americans.

I read this story in the press last weekend in central Oregon about this fellow who could not get an MRI. He had probably very few choices about what insurance company he could go to. Would it not be great if he would have the ability during an open window each year to be able to say: I am not satisfied with the service I am receiving or I am not satisfied with the premium I am being charged, and I want to change to a different company or a different provider to see if they do a better job. That is the heart of the American capitalist system if there is competition and, therefore, choice for the individual. These two things go hand in hand.

When folks say that what will happen with a public option is that it will reduce choice, I must say, what are they thinking, because we don't have choice now. But if you bring in a community health option or a public option, then you do have real choice as a citizen. You can march with your feet. You can sign up for this program or this program or this program.

We have competition between governmental opportunities and nongovernmental in other areas. I don't think I would like to say to the citizens in the State of Oregon: You no longer have a choice of mailing a letter with the post office. Everything you do regarding the mail has to be through a private company. I don't think I would like to say to the citizens of Oregon: You no longer have the choice of sending your kids to public school. You have to choose between solely private options.

It is a positive thing to have competition, and having a strong, robust public option is going to create a real opportunity for our citizens to choose and, in so doing, create this competition, improve service, and lower costs. If we don't lower costs, then we truly have not succeeded in health care reform.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward