[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 52 (Monday, April 22, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H3656-H3657]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      A POSITIVE SIGN FOR JUSTICE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, at the end of last week we learned of a 
breakthrough in a long stalemate between approximately 8,000 American 
hemophiliacs infected with HIV and the manufacturers of blood-clotting 
products that led to the hemophiliacs' infection. News reports indicate 
a settlement offer of $600 million if certain conditions are met. This 
is certainly a welcome development after years of fingerpointing and 
frustrated court proceedings. As I have said many times, it is time the 
victims of this tragedy in the United States achieved some closure in 
this case. It is my strong hope that this settlement proposal will lead 
to a concrete result for the victims and their families. These folks 
have suffered since the early 1980's with the knowledge that a product 
they relied on to improve their quality of life actually carried the 
virus that causes deadly AIDS. For many years, people in the hemophilia 
community have charged that more could have been done to make those 
products safe. While recognizing that hindsight is always crystal 
clear, many experts have concluded that efforts to develop and market 
safer products sooner were not given a high priority in the face of 
powerful incentives to preserve the status quo.
  Mr. Speaker, as Members know, I have sponsored legislation to provide 
compassionate assistance to these victims from the Government. It is my 
conclusion--and one reached by a distinguished panel of objective 
experts from the Institute of Medicine [IOM] at the National Academy of 
Sciences--that Government shares responsibility for this tragedy. The 
IOM panel outlined the failure of the regulatory system to recognize 
and respond to the early warning signs of blood-borne AIDS. According 
to the IOM report, the system ``Did not deal well with contemporaneous 
blood safety issues such as hepatitis and was not prepared to deal with 
the far greater challenge of AIDS.'' Citing the extent to which 
Government officials lacked independent analysis of 
scientific information or a strong interest in encouraging development 
of techniques to make blood products safer, the IOM report found ``a 
failure of leadership and inadequate institutional decision-making 
processes,'' which led Federal officials to ``consistently [choose] the 
least aggressive option that was justifiable.'' The IOM found that the 
Government ``did not adequately use its regulatory authority and 
therefore missed opportunities to protect the public health.'' As part 
of its concluding recommendations for changes in the system to prevent 
this type of crisis from recurring, the IOM panel suggested a 
compensation program involving the government--one similar to that 
which exists for vaccines. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is what I and 224 of 
my bipartisan colleagues in this House--and Senator DeWine and four of 
his colleagues in the other body--have sought to do with the Ricky Ray 
Hemophilia Relief Fund Act. This legislation is based on the premise 
that Government has a unique responsibility for regulating the safety 
of blood products and that Government failed to live up to that 
responsibility during the 1980s. We have not changed our view on that 
point, even in light of last week's welcome news about a potential 
settlement between the product manufacturers and the victims. It was

[[Page H3657]]

never our intention to substitute public money for private settlement--
but rather to stand up to a share of the obligation we believe rests 
with the Government. As Members know, in Japan recently a settlement 
was announced that involves both the industry and the Government. The 
Japanese proposal offers a significantly larger financial settlement 
than is being discussed in this country, with the Government 
shouldering 44 percent of the burden. In addition, apologies were 
extended to the victims and their families and the responsibility of 
the Japanese Government and the blood products companies was clearly 
acknowledged. While I commend the blood products companies for their 
offer to the American victims, I still think it is important that all 
parties involved stand up to their obligations and that means we must 
explore Government sharing in the compensation. Only in that way will 
real justice be reached in the United States.

                          ____________________