[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 150 (Tuesday, October 20, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12693-S12694]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ORGAN TRANSPLANT REGULATIONS
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to speak on a patient care issue of
enormous importance: regulations being promulgated by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services (HHS) with respect to organ transplantation.
I have long championed the need for our country to bring the
innovations of medical science to the forefront of patient treatment,
be it through pharmaceutical development, gene mapping, or artificial
organ development. Nowhere has this been more necessary than in the
realm of organ transplantation.
Over 14 years ago, with the passage of the National Organ Transplant
Act (NOTA), Congress intervened to advance medical science at a time
when our health care system was not keeping pace with the tremendous
advances medicine had to offer. As a result, we examined the role of
the private sector and the Federal government in organ transplantation
to formulate an equitable policy for individuals throughout this
country to have access to organ transplantation when appropriate and
necessary.
We needed a better system than that which existed at the time, and
that is what NOTA established. As the author of the National Organ
Transplant Act (NOTA) in 1984, which was cosponsored by our colleagues
Sentors Nickles, Thurmond, Grassley and Roth, I am proud of our
accomplishment, and I continue to maintain a very keen interest in our
country establishing and operating a viable, effective organ transplant
network.
There is no question that passage of NOTA has allowed us to save
thousands of lives. The medical community has been transplanting over
4,000 livers each year. We have seen valuable transplant technology and
services spread from only a handful of research institutions to
hospitals in rural America.
In my home State of Utah, LDS Hospital has been able to increase its
liver transplant volume over 15-fold since its inception only 13 years
ago. We have aspired to promote a system which allows medical science
to reach the people it was meant to serve, and I believe we are in
large part achieving that goal, in great measure due to enactment of
NOTA.
Today, I stand before the the Senate to urge that we not
precipitously reverse that work by allowing implementation of a new
system which could threaten to undermine many of the successful organ
transplant centers who are doing so much good in this Nation. Utah's
own successful transplant center comes to mind, although centers in
several other States such as Alabama, Louisiana, and South Carolina
would also be jeopardized if this regulation goes into effect.
While we in America are fortunate to enjoy the best health care in
the world, we also have concerns about the availability of life saving
care should an organ fail. Advances in medicine have made once rare
transplants commonplace. Yet, there is a scarcity of organs, despite
the hard work of local organ procurement agencies, transplant centers,
and, indeed, developers of artificial technology such as the work being
done on artificial hearts at the University of Utah.
Added to this concern about the availability of organs is a growing
anxiety about the impact of HHS's proposed transplant allocation rules.
A large source of this concern is within the hard-working transplant
community. In fact, the Department of Health and Human Services has
indicated that more than 85% of the almost 18,000 comments received
oppose the organ procurement transplant network final rule.
In particular, we are seeing a rising concern about variations in the
availability of organs from region to region. The HHS response, which
is to, in effect, nationalize distribution, seems logical at first, but
upon further reflection is a flawed policy with potentially devastating
near-term effects on many transplant centers. By diverting resources
from relatively ``organ-rich'' to relatively ``organ-poor'' regions,
the HHS rules penalize communities which have worked to build up
successful programs, including those which have done so much to improve
the harvesting rates of much-needed organs.
I commend Secretary Shalala for bringing the need to further improve
the organ transplant system to the forefront. One positive step is the
recent rule requiring all 5,200 U.S. acute care hospitals to notify an
organ procurement organization of every death as a condition of
Medicare participation. Health Care Financing Administrator Nancy Ann
Min-Deparle estimates that this step alone will increase organ
donations by up to 20 percent.
While this was a widely supported step, the proposed rules governing
the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network have not enjoyed the same
enthusiasm.
In January, I joined 41 other Senators who wrote to Secretary Shalaha
expressing concern that the proposed final rule could be used as
vehicle to turn organ allocation into a political process. Her response
did not alleviate my concerns, nor those of the transplant community.
We cannot damage the public trust in the organ network, nor in the
decisions
[[Page S12694]]
of health professionals who operate the transplant system. While it
will never be an easy task to allocate such a critical scarce
resource--organs--we cannot let this become nothing more than a turf
war between large and small transplant centers.
Large centers play an important role by being at the heart of the
innovations which have brought us the technical advances making current
liver transplant possible. Smaller centers also make many contributions
including making such technology more accessible to Americans. This
allows the patient to be closer to family and loved ones during this
stressful time.
We must find a way to increase the organs and reduce the perceived
inequities in the current system. We need the facts to address the
problem.
For this reason, I support the provision, which I understand will be
contained in the omnibus appropriations bill, that will place a one-
year moratorium on the implementation of the HHS rules. This moratorium
will allow us to learn the facts necessary to improve the availability
of transplantation.
Mr. President, what we have at stake is not just the amelioration of
a flawed organ transplant procurement and allocation system, but the
future of allocating scare health care resources of all types. It
behooves us to proceed carefully on this matter of utmost concern.
____________________