[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 10]
[House]
[Page 14509]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                        PATIENTS' BILL OF RIGHTS

  (Ms. SANCHEZ asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to voice my strong support for 
a real Patients' Bill of Rights, H.R. 2563, which is sponsored by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Ganske), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Dingell), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood), and the gentleman 
from Arkansas (Mr. Berry).
  In working to craft patient protection, we must ask ourselves, are we 
really helping the patient? One of the biggest concerns raised by the 
proponents of the competing bill is that the liability limit on 
punitive damages is too high in the Ganske-Dingell-Norwood-Berry bill.
  But I ask the Members, can anyone put a price tag on someone's life? 
If an HMO is found guilty of negligence, they should be held 
accountable for their actions; and HMOs exist to help patients, not to 
harm them. Opponents of the legislation argue that employers will be 
hurt by the liability provisions in this bill. This is misleading. 
Employers who do not directly participate in making medical decisions 
are protected from liability. Employers are also protected by language 
in the bill which allows them to name a designated decisionmaker to 
make decisions on their behalf.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 2563, the Ganske-Dingell-
Norwood-Berry bill.

                          ____________________