[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 18, 2011)]
[House]
[Page H238]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PATIENTS' RIGHTS REPEAL ACT WILL HAVE DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. LOWEY. Tomorrow, the House will vote on the Patients' Rights
Repeal Act. While none of us thought that the landmark reform bill
passed last year was perfect, repeal would only recreate many problems
that last year's bill solved. Instead of identifying specific
improvements, Republicans have proposed to repeal every single consumer
protection, protections that benefit all of our constituents. We cannot
allow this irresponsible bill to become law.
During the debate over health insurance reform in 2009, I received
countless letters from individuals throughout my district who testified
to the dire need to address high costs and inadequacy in service. For
example, a constituent from White Plains told me about her 27-year-old
son who was battling cancer and cannot afford some of the treatments.
She wrote, ``From discrimination by insurance companies against the
millions of us with `preexisting conditions' to lack of affordable
care, we've had enough.''
By ending denials of coverage based on preexisting conditions, 9,200
residents of my congressional district with preexisting conditions will
now have access to health insurance. That is just one benefit of reform
that's at stake.
If the repeal law were to become law, insurers could impose
devastating annual and lifetime benefit caps. Young adults would lose
coverage on their parents' plans. Pregnant women and breast cancer and
prostate cancer survivors could be denied coverage when they most need
it. Seniors would pay higher prescription drug costs. Consumer
protections for 445,000 constituents who have private insurance would
be rescinded, resulting in higher health care costs and reduced
coverage. 22,100 businesses and 91,000 families in my district would
not receive tax credits to access better and more affordable coverage.
Large insurers would no longer be required to spend at least 85 percent
of premiums on health benefits and justify large rate increases.
{time} 1950
And reforms the Commonwealth Foundation estimates will lower the rate
of premium increases by $2,000 on average by the end of the decade will
be undone.
I am very happy to work with anyone who genuinely wants to improve
health coverage and make it more affordable. I am deeply concerned that
this vote tomorrow is about keeping campaign promises without serious
examination of the impact of this repeal, especially on Americans like
my 27-year-old constituent in White Plains who has cancer.
To my colleagues, if you want to help your constituents who have
insurance and the millions of Americans who don't, I urge you to vote
``no'' on repealing every consumer protection that benefits them.
Thank you.
____________________