[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 52 (Thursday, May 4, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4039-S4040]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     TORT REFORM AND RELATED ISSUES

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, next week should be a week of looking at 
our health care system and debating on the direction that I think the 
policy should go in that area. Not only do we have tort reform that has 
been suggested by the leader, but also the ability of small business to 
band together across States to lower the cost of insurance, especially 
small business owners who have less than 10 employees, and sole 
proprietors, and even individuals, to band together and do something 
about lowering their costs of insurance.
  Today, I want to open minds and start setting the framework of what 
this debate is all about that will occur next week.
  It is about the unrestrained escalation of jury awards that are 
driving

[[Page S4040]]

up the cost of many medical procedures. Consequently, many of our best 
and brightest in the medical field are limiting services, retiring 
early, or move to States where liability premiums are stable in order 
to carry out their Hippocratic Oath. The true victims of this 
disturbing trend are the vulnerable and sick among us whose access to 
quality care becomes more restricted with each day that this crisis is 
not addressed. It is time for responsible legislators to do what is 
right for our health care system and the medical community and pass S. 
22, the Medical Care Access Protection Act of 2006 and S. 23, the 
Healthy Mothers and Healthy Babies Act.
  The consequences of this trend fall hardest on women and children. 
Contrary to what the other side may say, the exploding cost of 
liability insurance has limited access to OB/GYNs. It has caused women 
to receive less prenatal and preventive health care, and many low-
income women to lose critical access to community clinic services.
  This is not happening because of a sudden increase in physician 
negligence. It is happening because of the ever increasing number of 
lawsuits filed against health care providers each day. By and large, 
these are meritless suits filed by trial lawyers who seek to take 
advantage of the justice system in order to enrich themselves. I urge 
members of the Senate not to fall prey to the influence of these trial 
lawyers, and we know they have it. Every time this issue has come 
before this body, the trial lawyer lobby has flexed its muscle to put a 
stop to its progress. If we work together we can come to a plan to 
address this situation.
  Who is it that these trial lawyers are opposing? It is not only the 
pleas for help from doctors, who overwhelmingly support reform, it's 
also the will of the American people, who support medical liability 
reform at a rate of 75 percent. And the reason they support it is not 
because they think those who have been harmed by a doctor's negligence 
shouldn't be compensated, it's because they know how these trial 
lawyers are hurting them, their families and neighbors. They see the 
commercials from these so called law firms on late-night television 
offering to sue any doctor over anything and everything possible. Or 
they or someone they know has had difficulty finding an OB/GYN to 
deliver a baby.
  In fact, to give this issue even more of a human face, my daughter 
had to give up delivering babies because she could no longer afford the 
crushing burden of inflated insurance costs imposed upon her by these 
trial lawyers bringing frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit 
against OB/GYNs.
  Of course, insurance companies--we have heard they make all kinds of 
money. I tell you, in my State of Montana I think only a very few 
companies offer any kind of medical liability. While the trial lawyers' 
bank accounts have continued to grow, the number of doctors able to 
perform one of the most important acts a doctor can perform has gone 
down and patients are the ones being hurt.
  Given the choice between siding with doctors and patients or the 
legal community, I think I will take the side of the doctors and the 
patients every time.
  That is not to say if a person has been wronged or harmed by 
negligence, they shouldn't be able to recover their economic loss. It 
is time for us to step up to the plate and set the policy and finally 
do something to ease this cost of not only insurance but our total 
health care system.
  Those who would oppose medical liability reform will say there is no 
problem, there are no frivolous lawsuits, and these reforms only harm 
those who have been hurt by doctors' negligence. Those assertions are 
simply false. No two ways about it. Let's look at the facts. On any 
given day there are nearly 125,000 lawsuits pending against health care 
providers, and 75 percent of these will close with no payment.
  Some would say that is not bad, there is no harm, 75 percent will 
close with no payment--so what? The cost comes to the medical community 
when you have to pay for and provide a defense. Statistics show that of 
cases that do go to trial, 86 percent of the doctors will be found not 
liable. Still, the cost of defending the case is very costly. 
Consequently, the doctors who are targeted by these lawsuits will spend 
an average of $90,000 to defend themselves. That is added into the cost 
of our health care, not only for providers but also into our insurance 
premiums.
  More striking is the impact these suits have on American access to 
quality medical care. One in seven obstetricians no longer delivers 
babies due to the fear of being sued; 30 percent to 50 percent of high-
risk specialists are sued every year. That is a high number. How would 
you want to spend all this time in medical school, all this time and 
money, and then fall into a category that, once you go into practice, 
you have a 30- to 50-percent chance of being sued every year while you 
are in practice?
  Mr. President, 79 percent of physicians practice defensive medicine. 
What is that? It is ordering costly and unnecessary tests due to the 
fear of being sued, of not covering all the bases--not only covering 
all the bases but maybe covering them twice. This adds between $83 
billion and $151 billion per year in added costs to patients and their 
physicians.
  The impact on my State of Montana and other rural States has been 
even more disturbing. Today there are only 104 obstetricians practicing 
in Montana. The population of Montana is 900,000. Over the past decade, 
liability premiums for many hospitals, including many nonprofit 
critical access hospitals in Montana, have risen nearly 1,000 percent.
  I am a big proponent of rural health in order to maintain smaller 
hospitals, critical access hospitals, and delivery of health care 
services closer to the people. I think I have 12 or 13 counties that 
have no doctors at all--none, zip. That concerns me. People who live in 
those counties should have access to health care providers. Right now 
those of us in rural America simply cannot afford this. Right now, in 
Montana, we are very thin in those low populated counties that are 
remote from a bigger city that may have a larger medical corridor. As a 
result, many in my State travel hundreds of miles to see a doctor, 
sometimes all the way to cities such as Seattle and Minneapolis, Salt 
Lake City, or Denver, CO, for specialized care. I fear this situation 
will only worsen if we do not act now.
  We can't continue to sit back and allow this to go on, and allow this 
situation to damage our health care system. Our doctors cannot afford 
it and, more importantly, our loved ones who rely on access to 
affordable health care cannot afford it, either.
  I urge my colleagues to pass both of these bills, S. 22 and S. 23. 
These bills bring a fair and reasonable reform to medical liability 
systems, the system that will work. In fact, the model we are sort of 
patterning this one after is working in Texas. Since the enactment of 
similar laws in the State of Texas, the largest liability carrier has 
dropped its premium by 22 percent, competition in the health care 
liability market is increasing, premiums are stable or down, and access 
to health care is up. I think that is what we want to see happen.
  Clearly this approach is working to the benefit of doctors and 
patients and, more importantly, I want to put the emphasis on patients. 
The only people hurt by these commonsense reforms are the folks who 
make a living in frivolous lawsuits. So I call upon this body to reject 
their money, their influence, and do what is right for the American 
people, especially young mothers, and for healthy babies.
  I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________