[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8040-8041]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  MEDICAL CARE ACCESS PROTECTION ACT OF 2006 AND HEALTHY MOTHERS AND 
                   HEALTHY BABIES ACCESS TO CARE ACT

  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I regret that, twice this week, the Senate 
has failed to address the problem of medical liability costs. I support 
S. 22, the Medical Care Access Protection Act of 2006, and S. 23, the 
Healthy Mothers and Healthy Babies Access to Care Act. Both of these 
bills would address the very real problem of access to medical care for 
people in my State and across the country. We have a crisis in the 
United States, and in particular in Arizona, when it comes to the 
availability of providers.
  The terrible distortions in our medical liability system have been 
with us for years. In Arizona, we have seen emergency rooms that cannot 
remain open because there are not enough trauma surgeons and 
specialists to staff the ER, physicians who have decided to move from 
my State to States with more supportive medical liability law, and 
finally, doctors who have opted to retire early. It is troubling to 
have highly trained, dedicated, qualified members of the medical 
community leave or to give up their profession--all to the detriment of 
their patients.
  This shrinking availability of physicians is due in part to the high 
insurance premiums that doctors are facing. In just 5 years, the 
premiums for general surgery in Arizona increased from $37,804 to 
$56,862--an increase of 50 percent. For obstetricians in Arizona, 
premiums in 2001 were $49,436 and are now averaging $72,734. These 
premiums are rising at a staggering rate in part because juries in 
malpractice cases have given high-dollar verdicts to plaintiffs. Some 
of the verdicts are merited; many, we know, are not. In the end, these 
legal excesses damage the medical liability system, push up premiums, 
and lead to the early exodus of physicians. The system is broken and it 
is patients who suffer.
  Hard-working men and women who need emergency medical treatment face 
longer waiting times when there are too few physicians to staff 
hospitals. Instead of a few days, it takes weeks for children to be 
seen for complex conditions because of the lack of pediatric 
specialists. Our seniors are forced to drive longer distances because 
they are told that physicians are no longer seeing any new Medicare 
patients. The situation for both physicians and patients has grown 
bleak, and care is compromised.
  We should address this by enacting meaningful medical liability 
reform. S. 22 provides full recovery of the cost of necessary medical 
expenses and lost wages in a medical negligence case. When a wrong has 
occurred, it is important that the patient be able to gain a legal 
settlement or verdict that meets his or her future needs. This has 
always been a hallmark of medical liability legislation I have 
supported because it is in the best interest of the patient. New to S. 
22 is the Texas model of caps on noneconomic damages,limiting them to 
$750,000 for noneconomic damages from three parties. I hear constantly 
from physicians who share with me the escalating costs of medical 
liability insurance and the ways they have had to alter their practice 
to pay these bills.
  We have had an exodus of specialists from emergency room on-call 
rosters, and as you might have expected, hospitals are having trouble 
recruiting new physicians to the area. Compared to the national average 
of 283 physicians per 100,000 people, Arizona has only 207 physicians 
per 100,000 people.
  I recently got an e-mail from an emergency physician, Todd Taylor of 
Phoenix, who is leaving the clinical practice to go to Tennessee. He is 
giving up medicine at the age of 49, in part, he said, because he sees 
a bad situation getting worse. The American College of Emergency 
Physicians recently issued a ``national report card'' and graded the 
medical liability environment in Arizona a D-minus.
  I also heard about a woman in Arizona who returned to her 
obstetrician to deliver her second child, only to find out that 
physician had stopped delivering babies because of the high liability 
premiums. Arizona cannot afford to have physicians leave the State or 
curtail their practices.
  There are areas of my State like Apache County that don't have even a 
single obstetrician. That means women in labor have to drive to 
neighboring counties to deliver their children. Apache had only 34 
physicians in the whole county in 2004 and has seen even more 
physicians leave the area since then. One physician there, Thomas 
Bennett, said that his liability premiums, coupled with decreasing 
reimbursement, forced him out of his practice after 25 years. Dr. 
Bennett was an OB/GYN and always practiced in rural areas. What a loss 
to that community and to our State. S. 23, the second bill I mentioned, 
would provide liability protection for those who deliver babies and 
might keep physicians in practice or encourage obstetricians to 
practice in underserved areas like Apache Conty, AZ.
  This is not how the system was ever intended to work. If we want 
women and babies to enjoy the medical care they expect and deserve, we 
need to find ways to encourage physicians to practice throughout my 
State and throughout the country. We cannot afford to have doctors 
relocating to different States to find more favorable laws and for 
communities to go without vital services.
  The health care community has asked for the protections it needs to 
continue to provide services.
  My Senate colleagues should do the right thing for patients, 
physicians, and hospitals, and reconsider their opposition to medical 
liability reform now. We will keep coming back until they are willing 
to address this situation--not just for the medical community but for 
all of the patients it serves.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the issue of 
medical liability reform. Earlier this week, we attempted to bring the 
issue of medical liability reform to the Senate floor for a debate. Two 
bills were offered, S. 22, the Medical Care Access Protection Act, and 
S. 23, the Healthy Mothers and Healthy Babies Access to Care Act, both 
medical liability reform bills. We had two votes that would have simply 
allowed us to proceed to a debate on these two bills. Both of these 
procedural motions failed, and unfortunately we were unable to discuss 
this very important issue in the United States Senate.
  The American Medical Association has declared a medical malpractice 
crisis in 21 States, including my home State of Georgia. Hospitals, 
physicians, and patients in Georgia and across the Nation are being 
negatively impacted by rising costs in medical care and medical 
liability insurance premiums. Many health care providers have left 
their practices, retired, or moved to another State. As a result, we 
have seen a reduction in access to health care services and an adverse 
impact on the health and well-being of the citizens of Georgia. A new 
medical liability law in Georgia hopefully will help to improve the 
quality of health care services and assist in lowering the cost of 
health care liability insurance in my State. I applaud the lawmakers in 
the State of Georgia who took the time to address this issue on the 
State level and craft a law that will be beneficial to our physicians 
and patients.
  I was disappointed that the Senate was not able to bring this 
discussion to the floor. Many of my colleagues and I would have enjoyed 
the opportunity to participate in a healthy debate. While I do not 
agree with all aspects of the two proposed pieces of legislation, it is 
vital that we move forward with a discussion if we ever expect to find 
a solution. Many of the issues that come before the Senate are not easy 
ones. In order to find compromises, this body must participate in 
debates.

[[Page 8041]]

  Meaningful medical liability reform, at the Federal level, should 
help rid our court system of frivolous lawsuits, while addressing those 
who are seriously injured because of negligence. This reform would have 
to allow injured victims compensation for economic damages--medical 
expenses, rehabilitation costs, and loss of wages and future earnings--
as well as reasonable awards for pain and suffering. We need a system 
that allows patients the right to pursue any cause where injury is the 
result of negligence; while at the same time, we need a system that 
provides reasonable protection to hospitals and physicians.
  Our doctors throughout the country do amazing and heroic things 
everyday. I commend all of them for the hard work and long hours they 
put in to help ensure the health and wellness of the citizens in our 
great Nation. I am disappointed that the Senate could not move forward 
with a discussion on medical liability reform.

                          ____________________