[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 17]
[House]
[Page 24314]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



         VOTE AGAINST COBURN SUBSTITUTE AND FOR NORWOOD-DINGELL

  (Mr. TURNER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. TURNER. Madam Speaker, as a former member of a State legislature, 
both the House and Senate, I implore my colleagues today to support the 
Dingell-Norwood bill because it reserves in the States what for 2 
centuries has been a clear right of every State in this Nation, and 
that is to control the medical malpractice laws of our country.
  Why should we be able to sue a doctor for malpractice in State court 
but have to go to Federal Court to sue a managed care company? That is 
what the Coburn substitute does. That proposal is wrong; it does 
injustice to our State legislatures who work hard to be sure that we 
have malpractice protections for our citizens. It creates a new Federal 
cause of action that means individuals will have to go into Federal 
court.
  If we read the Coburn substitute carefully, we will find out that it 
denies due process even after someone gets to Federal court, because 
the Coburn substitute says that when an individual gets to Federal 
court, it is the decision of the external review panel that governs and 
that individual has no right to challenge that once they get to Federal 
court.
  I think it is a travesty of justice to support the Coburn substitute, 
and I urge the passage of the Norwood-Dingell bill.

                          ____________________