[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 106 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1721-E1722]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




HELP EFFICIENT, ACCESSIBLE, LOW-COST, TIMELY HEALTHCARE (HEALTH) ACT OF 
                                  2005

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 28, 2005

  Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition 
to H.R. 5, Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-Cost, Timely Healthcare 
(HEALTH) Act. This bill would hurt patients who are harmed by medical 
malpractice by arbitrarily capping damages, denying justice to injured 
patients and their families.
  This bill makes a number of changes to current law affecting medical 
malpractice lawsuits filed in Federal and State court, including 
limiting the amount of non-economic and punitive damages that could be 
awarded to a plaintiff, and restricting the contingency fees that can 
be charged by attorneys. The bill also pre-empts State laws that 
conflict with the enforcement of any of its provisions. The measure 
does not, however, pre-empt any State statutory limits on the amount of 
compensatory, punitive or total damages awarded in health care 
lawsuits. The provisions of the measure dealing with caps on awards 
would apply only to those States that have no statutory limits on 
damage awards in health care lawsuits.

[[Page E1722]]

  The bill seriously restricts the rights of injured patients to be 
compensated for their injuries, while rewarding insurance companies for 
bad investment decisions and doctors for practicing bad medicine. In 
the 13th District of Michigan and in many districts across the country, 
physicians have either retired prematurely or relocated their 
practices. The supporters of this bill claim their proposal would 
reduce insurance costs for doctors. This bill does not lower premiums 
for doctors, contains no insurance reforms, and would not address the 
rising cost of health care.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support the Democratic 
substitute, which would directly address rising premiums by reforming 
malpractice insurance and stopping frivolous lawsuits. The Democratic 
substitute does not restrict the rights of injured patients who file 
meritorious claims. It requires certification, with civil penalties, 
that a pleading is not frivolous, factually inaccurate or designed to 
harass. It includes a 3-year statute of limitation; establishes an 
alternative dispute resolution process; limits suits for punitive 
damages; and applies 50 percent of awards from any punitive damages to 
a patient safety fund at HHS. Finally, it requires insurance companies 
to develop a plan to give 50 percent of their savings to reductions in 
medical malpractice rates for doctors.
  It is unfortunate the Democratic Substitute was not adopted. H.R. 5 
in its present form does not address rising premiums and denies justice 
to injured patients and their families.
  Vote against H.R. 5.

                          ____________________