[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 127 (Tuesday, September 13, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 13, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                      ``WHAT WAS TOLD WAS WRONG''

                                 ______


                        HON. FORTNEY PETE STARK

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 13, 1994

  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to include in the Record a letter 
from the Swedish Minister of Health regarding certain untrue things 
said by the Senator from North Carolina about health care in Sweden.
  In 1980, Sweden and the United States were spending about the same 
percentage of GNP on health. We will soon be spending 15 percent and 
the Swedes will be spending a smaller portion on health than they spent 
15 years ago. Pretty impressive. More impressive: the Swedes have 
health insurance for all their people; we leave one in six uninsured. 
As the Minister says, ``that something needs to be done to give the 
Americans more care for less money seems obvious.''
  The Minister reports that waiting lines are reduced. In a society 
that is spending a little over half what we spend, it is amazing there 
are not longer lines. Long lines in the American system should not 
occur, because we are spending so much more on health.
  It would be silly for a Senator to say that our society, which spends 
so much, can't insure all its people and avoid long lines. To say that 
would be to say that Americans are less competent and less smart than 
Swedes.
                                            Ministry of Health and


                                               Social Affairs,

                             Stockholm, Sweden, September 5, 1994.
     U.S. Senator Jesse Helms,
     Washington, DC.
       Senator: It has come to my knowledge that the Swedish 
     example has a role in your campaign against the discussed 
     health care reform in your country. The voters in North 
     Carolina have got letters in which things are said about the 
     health care in a handful of countries--including Sweden. What 
     was told was fortunally wrong.
       My aim is not to interfere with the debate on a health care 
     reform in the USA, even if a brief study of your current 
     situation reveals problems to control costs; in 1980 USA and 
     Sweden used more money on health care than any other country, 
     about 9 per cent of our countries respective GDP. This was at 
     the time considered horrendous.
       The improvements in Sweden's health care services have 
     since then been undisputable. During the same period the GDP 
     percentage of the Swedish health care has even decreased 
     somewhat, at present to 8.5 per cent. At the same time the 
     American health care expenses have skyrocketed up to 15 per 
     cent of your GDP, going up every year. This is notable, 
     especially since the American population on average is so 
     much younger than that of Sweden. That something needs to be 
     done to give the Americans more care for less money seems 
     obvious.
       Now, what is it that you have said on Sweden?
       ``Or, do we want the kind of health care they have in 
     Sweden where the wait for an ordinary diagnostic heart x-ray 
     can take up to eleven months to receive--and then wait 
     another eight months for critical heart surgery?''

     (page two, letter dated ``Tuesday Morning'')

       This is your description of Swedish health care. The 
     purpose is to convince people that changes toward a health 
     care system more like the Swedish would be harmful. But never 
     mind the purpose, what is said about Sweden is untrue.
       Sweden like many countries, has had problems with waiting 
     lists. These waiting lists have not--as you suggest--
     concerned care which is necessary for patients' survival; 
     critical heart surgery has of course always been performed 
     as fast as is medically motivated. We have, however, had 
     problems with waiting lists for treatments like hip 
     replacements, cataracts etc. Bad enough.
       My first initiative as Minister of Health in the non-
     socialistic government was to introduce a reform to eliminate 
     waiting lists. The reform, called the Care Guarantee, has now 
     been in function for two and a half years and the waiting 
     lists have virtually disappeared.
       To get a heart x-ray you will have to wait for six weeks, 
     to get an operation about five. This is close to what is 
     manageable, no surgeon would normally like to have shorter 
     times for planning operations than three weeks, unless the 
     condition of the patient is critical. And in that case, as 
     said, the operation is carried out immediately.
       Senator, I understand that your idea of how good health 
     care to reasonable costs can be delivered differs from mine. 
     I do not expect or intend to convince you with this letter 
     that a health care reform is necessary for your country's 
     economy, and for the well-being of the American people. But I 
     do hope that you will not use my country's name in the 
     future, at least without first checking facts.
           Faithfully yours,
                                                       Bo Konberg,
     Minister of Health.

                          ____________________