[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 28, 2001)]
[House]
[Page H467]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          MANAGED CARE REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, last night, we heard our President 
talk all about accountability. He wants our schools and our teachers to 
be more accountable to their students and the parents. This literally 
patterns after what is in a lot of our State laws and in the State of 
Texas.
  He wants government to be more accountable to its citizens, and I 
think we all agree with both of those premises.
  Mr. Speaker, I also appreciate the President's support for HMO 
reform, and hopefully similar to what the law is in the State of Texas. 
HMOs should be accountable to their patients, just like schools should 
be accountable to their students and parents, and government should be 
accountable to the taxpayers and citizens.
  President Bush told us last night that he wants to promote quality 
health care through a strong, independent review organization, and I 
agree. The independent review organizations had been instrumental in 
the success of the Patients' Bill of Rights in the State of Texas.
  But the independent review organizations, the IROs, are powerless if 
health plans can ignore their recommendations without consequences. By 
providing legal remedies in State courts, patients have a layer of 
protection that ensures health plans will do the right thing.
  As much as the President talks about frivolous lawsuits, we have not 
seen that thing in Texas called a frivolous lawsuit. In fact, after 3 
years on the books, our patient protections there have been less than 
five lawsuits filed in 3 years, less than five. That is hardly the glut 
of lawsuits that opponents of patient protection seem to fear.
  The Texas plan for HMO reform has worked because the binding 
independent review protects health care plans from being held liable 
for punitive damages. You can provide that protection in there. But on 
the flip side, the HMO plans, the health plans know that if they ignore 
those independent review organization recommendations, they will have 
to answer in State court.
  That is a powerful incentive to do the right thing.
  The Bipartisan Patient Protection Act includes these important 
accountability provisions, while still protecting employers and health 
care plans from frivolous lawsuits.
  The Bipartisan Patient Protection Act ensures that HMO plans who 
follow the recommendations of that external review board cannot be held 
liable for punitive damages. It also limits the amount of damages that 
can be awarded so that the plans are not forced to pay arbitrary sums.
  Without accountability provisions, though, patients are defenseless 
against their HMO plans. They have no remedy if an HMO ignores the 
recommendation of the review board or acts in bad faith. Without 
accountability, a Patients' Bill of Rights provides no protections at 
all.
  We have to have accountability, just like we do from the government 
to our taxpayer. Mr. Speaker, managed care plans seem content to write 
the rules, but they cry foul when we want them to play by those same 
rules. It is time we level the playing field on the Federal level, just 
like a lot of our States have done, and ensure that HMOs provide the 
medical care that they agreed to do.
  That is why we should pass the Bipartisan Patient Protection Act.

                          ____________________