[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 373-374]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     PATIENTS' RIGHTS REPEAL ACT WILL HAVE DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Tomorrow, the House will vote on the Patients' Rights 
Repeal Act. While none of us thought that the landmark reform bill 
passed last year was perfect, repeal would only recreate many problems 
that last year's bill solved. Instead of identifying specific 
improvements, Republicans have proposed to repeal every single consumer 
protection, protections that benefit all of our constituents. We cannot 
allow this irresponsible bill to become law.
  During the debate over health insurance reform in 2009, I received 
countless letters from individuals throughout my district who testified 
to the dire need to address high costs and inadequacy in service. For 
example, a constituent from White Plains told me about her 27-year-old 
son who was battling cancer and cannot afford some of the treatments. 
She wrote, ``From discrimination by insurance companies against the 
millions of us with `preexisting conditions' to lack of affordable 
care, we've had enough.''
  By ending denials of coverage based on preexisting conditions, 9,200 
residents of my congressional district with preexisting conditions will 
now have access to health insurance. That is just one benefit of reform 
that's at stake.
  If the repeal law were to become law, insurers could impose 
devastating annual and lifetime benefit caps. Young adults would lose 
coverage on their parents' plans. Pregnant women and breast cancer and 
prostate cancer survivors could be denied coverage when they most need 
it. Seniors would pay higher prescription drug costs. Consumer 
protections for 445,000 constituents who have private insurance would

[[Page 374]]

be rescinded, resulting in higher health care costs and reduced 
coverage. 22,100 businesses and 91,000 families in my district would 
not receive tax credits to access better and more affordable coverage. 
Large insurers would no longer be required to spend at least 85 percent 
of premiums on health benefits and justify large rate increases.

                              {time}  1950

  And reforms the Commonwealth Foundation estimates will lower the rate 
of premium increases by $2,000 on average by the end of the decade will 
be undone.
  I am very happy to work with anyone who genuinely wants to improve 
health coverage and make it more affordable. I am deeply concerned that 
this vote tomorrow is about keeping campaign promises without serious 
examination of the impact of this repeal, especially on Americans like 
my 27-year-old constituent in White Plains who has cancer.
  To my colleagues, if you want to help your constituents who have 
insurance and the millions of Americans who don't, I urge you to vote 
``no'' on repealing every consumer protection that benefits them.
  Thank you.

                          ____________________