[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 13943-13944]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                        PATIENTS' BILL OF RIGHTS

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from West 
Virginia.
  Let me try to talk about this in a more blunt way, not in a bitter 
way, but let me be direct about it.
  I think it is just outrageous. Mr. President, you are a friend. I 
hate to have such angry words. But we should be debating. Personally, I 
wish we were talking about universal health care coverage. The 
insurance industry took it off the table. They dominate too much of 
this political process.
  I think Senator Feingold and I, before this debate is over, will come 
out and just talk about the contributions from all the different 
parties that are affected by this health care legislation. We should be 
talking about universal health care coverage. But we certainly also 
should be talking about patient protection.
  We have a system where the bottom line is becoming the only line. It 
is becoming the incorporated and industrialized system.
  The Republicans say they have a plan--the Republican ``patient 
protection plan''--which I think really is an insurance company 
protection plan. It covers about 48 million people. The people who 
aren't covered, because of the risk--they can't be covered, because 
they are in self-insured plans because of what the States do.
  Our plan covers 163 million people.
  No wonder my colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't want to 
debate this.
  Second point: Who defines ``medical necessity''?
  Our plan makes it clear that the providers decide what the care 
should be for the consumer, for our children, for ourselves, for our 
loved ones. The Republican plan is not so clear on this question.
  No wonder my colleagues don't want to have any debate.
  Point of service option: I remember having an amendment in committee 
when we wrote this bill which at least would let people, if they are 
willing to pay a little more, be able to purchase care outside of the 
network, outside of the plan. If they need to go to see a specialist 
they hear about who would make such a difference and would give them 
the care they need, or for their loved one, we provide for that. The 
Republican plan--the insurance-company protection plan--doesn't.
  No wonder they don't want to debate this.
  Who does the review?
  When you want to make an appeal and you say you have been denied the 
access to the physician you need to see, or your family can't get the 
care they need, do you have an external review process? Is there an 
ombudsman program back in our States? Make it grass roots. Do not talk 
about centralized public policy. Make it happen back in our States. An 
ombudsman program with external review, somewhere consumers can say: I 
have been denied the care I need.
  The Republican insurance company protection plan doesn't provide for 
that. Our legislation does. We have a difference, America, between the 
two parties, that makes a difference in your lives.
  With all due respect, I understand why my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle don't want to debate. The Senate is supposed to be 
the world's greatest deliberative body. Our colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle don't get the right to tell us that we won't be able 
to bring amendments to the floor, we won't be able to have a full-scale 
discussion, and we won't be able to have a thorough debate.
  I can't wait for this debate. I introduced the patient protection 
bill 5 years ago, half a decade ago. This will be a great debate. I 
think the country will love this debate. The people in Minnesota and 
the people in our different States will say they are talking about a 
set of issues that are important to their lives.
  The pendulum has swung too far in the direction of the big insurance 
companies that own and control most of the managed care plans in our 
country. Consumers want to know where they fit in. Ordinary citizens 
want to know where they fit in. The caregivers, the doctors and the 
nurses, want to know where they fit in. When they went to nursing 
school and when they went to medical school, they thought they would be 
able to make the decisions and provide people with care. Now they find 
they can't even practice the kind of medicine that they imagined they 
would practice when they were in medical school.
  Demoralized caregivers are not good caregivers. We have demoralized 
doctors and nurses; we have consumers who are denied access to care 
they need; we have corporatized, bureacratized bottom-line medicine, 
dominated by the insurance industry in this country.
  We have a piece of legislation to at least provide patients with some 
protection and caregivers with some protection, and our Republican 
colleagues don't want to debate this. I am not surprised. I am not 
surprised.
  On the other hand, you can't have it all ways. We wrote this bill in 
the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee. We had a pretty 
good markup where we sat down, wrote the bill, and had pretty good 
debate. I was disappointed that a lot of important amendments 
protecting consumers were defeated on a straight party vote.
  Now it is time to bring this legislation to the floor. As a Senator 
from Minnesota, I say to Senator Daschle that I absolutely support what 
he is doing. I absolutely support what we are doing as Democrats. In 
fact, I am particularly proud right now to be a Democrat because I 
always feel a lot better when we are talking about issues that make a 
real difference to people's lives.
  As far as I can tell, most of the people in our country are still 
focused on how to earn a decent living, how to

[[Page 13944]]

give their children the care they need and deserve, how to do good by 
our kids, to do good by our State and country, how to not fall through 
the cracks on decent health care coverage, how to make sure we have 
affordable, dignified, germane, good health care for our citizens.
  This doesn't even get us all the way there. It seems to me the 
Senate, by bringing this bill to the floor, by having the opportunity 
to offer amendments and having the debate, can do something very 
positive. We can do something to make an enormous difference in the 
lives of people we represent.
  The Democrats aren't going to let up. We are going to keep bringing 
our amendments to the floor. We are going to keep talking about health 
care policy. We are going to keep talking about consumer protection and 
patient protection. We are going to keep talking about how to make sure 
the people we represent get a fair shake in this health care system. We 
are going to keep saying that it is not our responsibility to be 
Senators representing the insurance companies; we are supposed to be 
representing the vast majority of people who live in our States. That 
is what we are going to do, as long as it takes.
  I am ready for this debate. I am ready. Let's start it now.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative assistant proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, just a footnote. Altogether, we had 16 
Democrats come to the floor to speak about the importance of patient 
protection and we have had two Republicans.
  In one way I am not surprised because I don't think my colleagues 
have a defensible case. They don't want to bring this motion to the 
floor. They don't want to have a debate. They don't want to vote on the 
amendments. But that is what it is all about.
  We are not here to dodge; we are not here not to make difficult 
decisions. We are not here to not be willing to debate legislation that 
is important to people's lives.
  I say to the majority leader and my colleagues on the other side, it 
is true; we will have amendments. I have some great amendments in my-
not-so-humble opinion. Others may have a different view.
  The point is, that is what it is about. Bring the amendments to the 
floor. As Democrats, we will discuss what we believe, we will talk 
about the legislation and the amendments we have that we think will 
lead to the best protection for people we represent in our States. And 
Republicans will come out and they can talk about why they think these 
amendments are a profound mistake and why their amendments will do 
better. They can talk about their legislation and we can talk about our 
legislation. Maybe we will have plenty of compromise and maybe we will 
come up with a great bipartisan bill. Who is to say?
  Right now, all we have on the other side is silence, an unwillingness 
to debate this issue. If I didn't think I was taking advantage of the 
situation, part of me is tempted to keep talking and asking Members to 
come on out and debate. I won't. I think I made my point about 20 
different times in 20 different ways.
  Since the Senator from Alabama is presiding, I do want to say this 
for people who are watching: The Senator from Alabama can't debate 
because he is the Presiding Officer. He would. I know him well enough.
  I say to Senator Sessions, we will get a chance, and all the rest of 
the Senate will have a chance, to come out and debate patient 
protection legislation. Let's have a good, substantive, serious debate. 
I know the Senator from Alabama loves a debate and he is good at it. So 
are many other Senators. It will not be debate for the sake of debate. 
It will not be fun and games. It will be a very serious issue.
  Honest to gosh, I came here as a Senator from Minnesota to do good 
for people in my State. I can't do good for people in my State when I 
have a majority party that wants to block patient protection 
legislation. I didn't come here to represent the insurance industry. I 
didn't come here to represent the pharmaceutical industry. I came here 
to represent people in Minnesota.
  I want us to debate this legislation. I certainly hope Republican 
colleagues will come out here and we will get going on this. Otherwise, 
for as long as it takes, I think we are committed to using every bit of 
leverage we have to force a debate on this question.
  Mr. President, if there are other colleagues on the floor, and it 
looks as if maybe there are, I will yield the floor. I see my colleague 
from Tennessee. I say to my colleague from Tennessee, I am delighted he 
is out here. I hope this is the beginning of a discussion. Then we will 
have this legislation on the floor soon. Let's have the debate. Let's 
pass good legislation that will help people in our States.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.

                          ____________________