[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 5]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 6849]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




HELP EFFICIENT, ACCESSIBLE, LOW-COST, TIMELY HEALTHCARE (HEALTH) ACT OF 
                                  2003

                               Speech of

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB ETHERIDGE

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 13, 2003

  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 5, the 
Republican medical malpractice bill, and the process by which it is 
being debated in this House.
  Today, the House will pass H.R. 5, a bill to impose caps on damages 
that may be awarded for medical malpractice, defective products, and 
other health related wrongdoings. Like many Members of this House, I am 
concerned about the rising cost of medical malpractice insurance and 
its impact on physicians and their patients, but H.R. 5 is not the 
right medicine for this national problem.
  I oppose H.R. 5 because it will not reduce medical malpractice 
premiums. What's more, it protects manufacturers of defective 
pharmaceutical and medical equipment from product liability actions, 
and overturns North Carolina state law.
  Years of experience prove that limiting patient rights to seek legal 
remedies for medical malpractice will not reduce insurance rates for 
doctors or hospitals. We've heard a lot of debate on this floor today 
about California's law that caps damage awards in medical malpractice 
cases at $250,000. Supporters of H.R. 5 misses the point in this 
debate, Mr. Speaker. Instead of dealing with the real issue here, which 
involves insurance rates, the Republican Majority is turning this 
serious issue into a political football at the expense of patients.
  H.R. 5 also limits the ability of injured persons to bring suits 
against pharmaceutical companies, HMOs, nursing homes, and medical 
device manufacturers, thus setting a dangerous precedent allowing these 
entities to escape the law in even the most severe cases of neglect and 
abuse.
  Finally, H.R. 5 undermines North Carolina's patients protection 
statutes, which are some of the strongest in the nation.
  My colleagues Mr. Dingell and Mr. Conyers have drafted an alternative 
amendment to H.R. 5. This alternative will help courts weed out 
frivolous lawsuits without restricting the rights of legitimate claims, 
repeal the federal anti-trust exemption for medical malpractice 
insurance companies, thereby increasing competition and lowering 
premiums, and provide targeted assistance directly to physicians, 
hospitals, and communities in medical malpractice crisis areas. 
Finally, the alternative establishes an independent advisory commission 
to examine and recommend long-term solutions to this important issue. 
Unfortunately, the Republican Leadership has denied us an opportunity 
to offer this alternative.
  Mr. Speaker, the issue of a insurance is an important one. Yet, it 
seems that the Republican Majority has forgotten one of the key tenets 
of the Hippocratic oath--do no harm or injustice. H.R. 5 will without a 
doubt harm America's patients. I urge all of my colleagues to vote 
against H.R. 5 and to support the motion to recommit the bill.

                          ____________________