[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 18980-18981]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  HELP EFFICIENT, ACCESSIBLE, LOW COST, TIMELY HEALTH CARE ACT OF 2002

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 26, 2002

  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the bill 
H.R. 4600, which is before us today. We are facing a medical 
malpractice problem. We are also facing a medical malpractice insurance 
problem. But rather than addressing those issues, this bill would 
actually make both problems worse. The Institute of Medicine study, "To 
Err is Human," reported that between 44,000 and 98,000 Americans die 
each year from medical errors, making medical malpractice the 8th 
leading cause of death. More people die from medical errors than from 
automobile accidents, breast cancer or AIDS. We also know that a 
handful of physicians and facilities are responsible for the lion's 
share of medical malpractice cases. Does this bill do anything about 
improving health care safety? Does it make it easier for patients to 
avoid dangerous physicians or facilities? Does it require that those 
with bad medical records--like bad drivers--get charged higher 
malpractice premiums while safe providers--like safe drivers--get 
discounts? No.
  We also know that we have a medical malpractice insurance problem. 
Just as businesses and health care consumers are complaining about 
double digit premium increases, so, too, are providers. Once again, the 
evidence suggests a solution. Medical malpractice insurance companies 
made bad investments--now they are raising premiums to pay for their 
mistakes. Studies show that there is usually no connection between 
premiums and payouts--with no or little regulation, insurers are free 
to charge what they want. Does this bill do anything about medical 
malpractice insurance practices? Does it even require that the federal 
government monitor premiums to determine the effect of this bill on 
premiums and make sure that insurers don't just pocket any savings 
instead of passing them through lower premiums? Do the authors of this 
bill have any evidence from the insurance industry that premium rates 
will come down or moderate if we pass H.R. 4600? No.
  Instead of addressing medical malpractice or medical malpractice 
insurers, this bill is a plain and simple assault on the rights of 
consumers--health care patients and their families who have already 
been injured once would be injured again and again because of this 
bill. There is not a single provision in this bill that strengthens the 
rights of consumers or improves their access to quality care. But there 
is not a single provision in this bill that doesn't erode consumers' 
legal rights to win compensation for their injuries and to send the 
signal that dangerous medicine does not pay. This bill doesn't just 
affect physicians. It provides a broad liability shield for drug 
companies, nursing homes, medical device manufacturers and suppliers. 
This bill may well increase health insurance premiums to small 
businesses and individuals because it says that, if you are fortunate 
enough to have health insurance, your policy may have to pay your costs 
even if you prove malpractice in a court of law. And most disturbing of 
all, this bill puts a $250,000 price tag on the life of a child. The 
authors of this bill say that we shouldn't worry about caps on non-
economic damages. After all, they say, there are no caps on economic 
damages. But there are no economic damages to compensate for the loss 
of an infant or a grandmother, for the loss of sight or mobility. This 
bill tells all those families who suffer those losses--through proven 
malpractice--that their losses are worth a paltry $250,000. I urge this 
body to reject this anti-consumer bill. I also urge my colleagues to 
read the attached letter, sent to me by USAction, regarding this 
important issue.

                                                    US Action,

                               Washington, DC, September 24, 2002.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of our twenty-four statewide 
     organizations, I want to express our strong opposition to 
     H.R. 4600, the so-called HEALTH Act, and ask that you vote no 
     when it is considered on the House floor this week.
       H.R. 4600 is a direct assault on the rights of consumers. 
     Instead of addressing the root of the premium problem--the 
     insurance industry--it attacks medical malpractice victims 
     themselves. Nursing home residents, prescription drug and 
     medical device users, and other patients would all lose 
     rights that they have had since the beginning of our nation. 
     Yet, there are absolutely no indications from the medical 
     malpractice industry that this harsh, anti-consumer 
     legislation would result in any reduction in premium rates or 
     greater accessibility of malpractice insurance.
       At the same time that more and more FDA-approved drugs are 
     being pulled off the market because of safety concerns, this 
     bill would immunize drug or medical device manufacturers if 
     their product had been approved by the FDA or is "generally 
     recognized as safe and effective." While more and more

[[Page 18981]]

     families are concerned about nursing home quality, this bill 
     would limit the liability of nursing homes that knowingly put 
     their residents at risk. Under H.R. 4600, Congress would 
     place a $250,000 limit on the loss of a child or sight or the 
     ability to walk. These are just a few of the most outrageous 
     provisions of this bill, which would put more consumers at 
     risk and shield dangerous manufacturers and practitioners 
     from full liability for their actions. And it does so without 
     any guarantee that malpractice rates would fall or even any 
     provision that the federal government would monitor those 
     rates to determine their appropriateness.
       Again, I urge you to protect health care consumers by 
     voting against this irresponsible and dangerous bill.
           Sincerely,
                                                   William McNary,
                                                        President.

     

                          ____________________