[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 146 (Monday, October 25, 1999)]
[House]
[Page H10727]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        URGING REJECTION OF H.R. 2260, PAIN RELIEF PROMOTION ACT

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, on Wednesday the House will consider 
H.R. 2260, called the Pain Relief Promotion Act. The legislation is 
seriously misnamed and is designed simply to undercut Oregon's death 
with dignity law. I find it ironic, because nobody outside the Beltway 
is interested in criminalizing doctors' decisions that deal with some 
of the most profound and difficult that they will ever make. In fact, 
every day in America we see instances where life support is withdrawn; 
every day in America drugs are administered to alleviate pain which 
actually hasten the onset of death; every day in America some drugs are 
withheld which cause a shock to the system and in turn cause death; 
every day in America there are some very tragic incidents where people 
are driven to desperate acts because they cannot control their 
situation, often painful and traumatic for their families, occasionally 
involving actual suicide. Most of America looks the other way.
  My State of Oregon has taken the lead to try and provide a framework 
for these end-of-life decisions. Oregon voters have not once but twice 
approved a thoughtful approach to give patients, their doctors and 
families more control under these most difficult of circumstances. 
Despite the dire predictions of a tidal wave of assisted suicide, the 
evidence suggests that when people actually have control in these 
difficult situations, the knowledge that they have such control means 
that they are less likely to use assisted suicide. In fact, last year 
it appears that there were only 15 cases in Oregon.
  But with the legislation that is proposed under H.R. 2260, doctors 
are going to have to fear being second-guessed by prosecutors, police 
and nonmedical drug enforcement bureaucrats on a case-by-case basis, 
for the very initial section of that bill points out that prescribing 
pain medication can often hasten death. But that is okay under this 
bill, as long as the intent is pure. In essence, it means that the 
doctors are going to be caught looking over their shoulders, having 
each and every one of their decisions subject to second-guessing and 
potentially subjected to life in prison if the intent appears in the 
judgment of others to be wrong.
  This is another sad example of where politicians are out of step with 
Americans on key personal health issues. I find of great interest one 
other area that sort of indicates where we are going. The medical use 
of marijuana was approved by eight States before last year. Six other 
States had their voters approve it and the District of Columbia. 
Citizens are indicating that they want more freedom to have pain 
managed and have personal control. I think it would be sad if this 
Congress decided to penalize the one State that is trying not to sweep 
it under the rug but provide a framework for making these decisions.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to make a careful examination of H.R. 
2260. They will find why the Oregon Medical Association, the 
associations of eight other States, the American Nurses Association and 
the American Academy of Family Physicians have all urged its rejection. 
If you want to outlaw assisted suicide, go ahead and do it if you must, 
but certainly we should not subject our physicians to criminalization 
of their basic medical decisions.




                          ____________________