[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 113 (Wednesday, August 4, 1999)]
[House]
[Page H7237]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              IMPORTANT PROVISIONS FOR PATIENT PROTECTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. VITTER. Mr. Speaker, after careful thought and consideration, I 
rise this evening in support of patient protection. I do this for a 
very simple reason in the final analysis. I believe that doctors, not 
insurance companies or HMOs, must have the final say on patient care. 
That is why I have many strong concerns with the Senate bill and would 
oppose that legislation in its present form.
  Here are the provisions I believe are important to Americans, 
including those in my district: Legislative protections against abuse 
should be extended to the more than 100 million not covered in the 
Senate bill. There must be independent external medical review. 
Patients need maximum flexibility to select doctors and should be able 
to see pediatricians and OB/GYNs without referrals from other doctors. 
ER visits should be governed by a prudent lay person standard. Doctors 
should define medical necessity. There must be meaningful economic 
sanctions against companies that refuse to provide care approved by the 
external review process.
  I know the importance of controlling health care costs, but a 
business bottom line, Mr. Speaker, should never be allowed to take 
precedence over medical necessity. We can allow insurers to continue to 
control costs and provide necessary patient protections. Many States 
have done that, including my own, Louisiana, including our neighbor, 
Texas. We can do it as a Nation.

                          ____________________