[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 82 (Monday, June 20, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H4725-H4726]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CANADA SUPREME COURT STRIKES BAN ON PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, earlier this month the Supreme Court
overturned a law that prevented people from buying health insurance,
that is, private health insurance, to pay for medical services
available from and through Medicare, the publicly funded system. The
ruling means that citizen residents can pay privately for medical
service, even if the services are already covered under the state-
provided health care system.
Now, what does that mean? Perhaps you did not see this ruling, but
that is because it was not the United States Supreme Court and Medicare
and ``private contract'' we are talking about. It was the Canadian
Supreme Court and Canada's socialized health care program under
Medicare and Quebec's ban.
Now, how did this come about? Well, a courageous Canadian doctor,
Jacques Chaoulli, and his patient, 70-year-old Montreal businessman,
George Zeliotis, waited for a hip surgery replacement, decided enough
is enough, and challenged the constitionality of the Canadian ban on
private payment. He argued that long waiting lines and times for
surgery contradicted the country's constitutional guarantee of ``life,
liberty and the security of the person.'' He argued that the wait was
unreasonable, endangered his life, and infringed on his constitutional
rights.
The Court split 3-3 over whether the ban on private insurance
violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, something like
our Bill of Rights, but agreed in striking the ban, saying that,
``Access to a waiting list is not access to health care'', in its
ruling. They went on further to say, ``The evidence in this case shows
that delays in the public health care system are widespread, and that,
in some serious cases, patients die as a result of waiting lists for
public health care. The evidence also demonstrates that the prohibition
against private health insurance and its consequences of denying people
vital health care results in physical and psychological suffering that
meets a threshold test of seriousness.''
Now, my colleagues, while the ruling applies only to the province of
Quebec, one wonders if this could fundamentally change the way health
care is delivered across that country. Canada is currently the only
major industrialized country in the world that does not allow any
private administration of health care services that are provided by the
public system.
Now, John Williamson, President of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
said with hope, ``This is a breach in government monopoly health care
in this country''. That is in Canada. ``It is going to open up
litigation across the country and the other nine provinces as taxpayers
there press for their same right, which is the right to seek and buy
insurance to cover private health care.''
And some Canadians worry that this is the beginning of the end of
what they considered a national treasure. Well, this is not cause for
alarm, or by those who have for years argued for our Medicare private
contract ban here in the United States, it simply is not a threat, said
the Court. ``It cannot be concluded from the evidence concerning the
Quebec plan or the plans of the other provinces of Canada, or from the
evolution of the systems of various OECD countries, that an absolute
prohibition on private insurance is necessary to protect the integrity
of the public plan.''
And I would argue, my colleagues, in fact, it is the Canadian middle
class who have probably been most injured, not the very, very wealthy,
because they just pay out of pocket. They can afford it. Remember that
the ban is on private insurance, not private health care, so the very
rich could still go on and get out of this waiting line that the rest
of the middle class have to continue to participate in.
And furthermore, a whole industry of medical tourism was spawned. For
decades Canadians of means have been traveling to the premiere medical
facilities here in the United States, especially in my sunny locales in
the State of Florida to enjoy lovely weather, while they are also
getting the benefits of health care facilities in Florida.
This means that the Court, the Canadian Court, sees that a national
comprehensive coverage program can
[[Page H4726]]
peacefully coexist with private health insurance. My colleagues, we
have been saying that in the United States for years.
____________________