[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2003, Book I)]
[March 4, 2003]
[Pages 236-242]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]
Remarks to the American Medical Association National Conference
March 4, 2003
Thanks for such a warm welcome. I appreciate the invitation. I'm
honored to be with so many of our Nation's fine physicians and their
loved ones.
You've come to our Capital when this Government faces many critical
issues. You're here at an historic time. We have got a lot of
responsibilities here in Washington. We have the responsibility to
defend the American people against the threats of a new era. We have a
responsibility to win the first war of the 21st century, and we're
working hard to win that war.
Over the weekend, American and Pakistani authorities struck a
serious blow to Al Qaida by arresting Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Sheik the top operational planner, the top killer of
the Al Qaida network. The man who masterminded the September the 11th
attacks is no longer a problem to the United States of America.
It's a different kind of war than we're used to in America. It's a
war that requires patience and focus. It's a war in which we will hunt
down those who hate America, one person at a time. The terrorists are
learning there is no place safe for them in this world. They're
discovering that justice can arrive by different means, at any hour of
the day or night. They're discovering the meaning of American resolve,
our deep desire to defend our freedom and to keep the peace.
It is important for our fellow citizens to recognize life changed on
September the 11th, 2001. Obviously, it changed in a tragic way for
those who lost loved ones as a result of the coldblooded attacks on our
people. But we learned a harsh lesson, and that is, oceans can no longer
protect us from those who hate America and what we stand for. And
therefore, it's important for the United States to take every threat
which may gather overseas seriously, that we can no longer pick or
choose whether a threat requires our involvement. If we
[[Page 237]]
see gathering threats which can harm the American people, we must deal
with them.
We're dealing with Iraq because the dictator of Iraq has got weapons of mass destruction. He's used weapons
of mass destruction on his own people. He can't stand America. He can't
stand our friends. He can't stand our allies. He's got connections to
terrorist networks. The first war of the 21st century requires the
United States to work with international bodies to deal with these
threats, and we will continue to do so.
I went to the United Nations to remind them that that body has a
responsibility to make sure its words means something. I reminded them
that for 12 long years the United Nations has asked Saddam to disarm because he's dangerous. We went and got
another resolution almost 4 months ago, unanimously approved by the
Security Council, which said clearly, ``Saddam, you must disarm.''
The choice is Saddam Hussein's to make.
It is his choice to determine whether there's war or peace. It is his
choice to decide whether to listen to the demands of the free world. But
no matter what his choice may be, for the sake of peace, for the sake of
freedom, for the sake of security of our people, Saddam Hussein will be
disarmed.
We have a responsibility to create jobs and increase the momentum of
our economy. The role of Government is not to create wealth but an
environment in which the entrepreneurial spirit of America can flourish.
That's why I'm working with Congress to accelerate tax relief which
they've already passed, to get rid of the double taxation of dividends,
to encourage investment. The more money people have in their pockets,
the more likely it is they'll demand a good or a service. And when they
demand a good or a service, in the marketplace somebody will provide
that good or a service. And when they do, somebody in America is more
likely to find work.
And today I've come to discuss another responsibility, which is to
improve the health care in America. Our vision, our goal is a system in
which all Americans have got a good insurance policy, in which all
Americans can choose their own doctor, in which seniors and low-income
citizens receive the help they need, in which--the system is one in
which the patient-doctor relationship is the center of good medical
care.
This vision stands in stark contrast to the Government-run health
care ideas, the ideas in which the Federal Government decides care, the
Federal Government rations care, the Federal Government dictates
coverage, a vision which, in my judgment, will stifle innovation, stifle
quality, and run up the costs on the patients of America.
We have a lot of work to do on this important issue, but I believe
the job can get done. That's why I've advanced this agenda. Speaker of
the House Denny Hastert Dennis is committed to
working toward positive reforms. In the United States Senate, there's a
new majority leader. He knows a few things about
doctors and patients and their relationships.
I'm here to ask for your help and let you know that we're going to
seize the moment and work with people in both parties to achieve
meaningful reform that meets the vision that will make health care
positive and optimistic and hopeful for all our citizens.
And so, I want to thank you for letting me come. I appreciate Yank
Coble. Jr. They told me a guy from Jacksonville,
Florida, named Yank was going to introduce me. [Laughter] I asked him,
``Why Yank?'' He said he didn't have enough time to explain it.
[Laughter]
I'm honored that Tommy Thompson is
here. Tommy's doing a fine job.
Today we've got a Member of Congress with us from the State of
Pennsylvania, and that's Congressman Jim Greenwood. I'm honored you're here, Jim. I appreciate your
[[Page 238]]
dogged determination to pass medical liability reform.
I want to thank Mike Maves and Ed
Hill, Edward all the members of the American Medical
Association Board of Trustees, and thank you all for coming.
Americans are proud of their doctors and proud of their nurses,
proud of the medical professionals in our country. Our Nation has the
finest medical professionals in the world. You are more than members of
a profession; you are each living out a great calling. You show your
concern for patients through years of training and lifetimes of
commitment to the well-being of others. I appreciate the work you do.
And I want to thank you for your skill, your talent, and your
compassion.
America has the best health care system in the world. We have
outstanding medical schools, great hospitals, brilliant researchers.
We're on the leading edge of new technologies. We're closing in on cures
to some of the most feared diseases of mankind. I'm optimistic about our
future. That's why I worked with Congress to make sure that the National
Institutes of Health received record-level amounts of funding, so that
we can be on the leading edge of change, so that we can deal with
problems that years ago seemed insurmountable, so that people can live
better lives. Yet amidst the optimism, it's important for us to
recognize there are serious challenges that we have in health care, and
we must confront them now and not wait.
Too many of our citizens go without health care. I propose
refundable tax credits to help low-income people purchase their own
health insurance. Too many of our citizens use expensive emergency rooms
as their main source of health care because they have no other options.
We need to make sure those folks have preventative care and treatment
before they go to the emergency room. And that's why I proposed and
Congress passed increased funding for community and migrant health
centers all across the country.
The cost of health care is rising at the fastest rate in more than a
decade. There are reasons why there are rising costs. Research is
costly. New technologies are expensive, and they're worth the expense.
When you save lives with technologies, it's worth the expense. But other
rising costs are unnecessary. And the problem doesn't start in the
waiting room or in the operating room. It starts in the courtroom. We
have a problem in America. There are too many frivolous lawsuits against
good doctors, and the patients are paying the price.
Even the most frivolous of lawsuits can be expensive. A doctor and
his or her insurance company must spend money to fight the frivolous
lawsuit or, in many cases, settle it to get rid of it. Either way,
premiums go up. Either way, the patient pays. When liability premiums
get too expensive, some docs stop seeing patients.
If one of the goals of a good health care system is for it to be
affordable and accessible, and if lawsuits are running up the cost of
medicine and/or driving docs out of business because the practicing of
medicine is too expensive, we've got to do something about it. We've got
to make sure that the stories I hear about are remedied with good law.
I was in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and met Debra DeAngelo, a fine lady. She's got a great safety record in her
pain management clinic. She loved living in Scranton because that's
where she was raised. She wanted to practice her talents with the people
with whom she was raised. Her liability insurance became so expensive
that she couldn't practice medicine in Scranton, Pennsylvania, anymore,
and she shut down her clinic, which employed 10 and served 2,000
patients.
In describing her story, she was
heartbroken that she couldn't practice where she wanted to practice. She
wasn't heartbroken for herself; she was heartbroken for the patients for
whom she had great concern and great care. She and her family moved
[[Page 239]]
to Hershey, where she's working for a hospital which is covering her
insurance needs. Scranton, Pennsylvania, lost a fine person because
liability insurance drove her out of town. No good doctor should be
forced to leave a community they know and serve simply because of the
costs of insurance.
Many doctors serve their fellow humans in some of the most
compassionate ways. I went down to Mississippi, met a man who had moved
to Mississippi to provide health care for some of our most neediest
citizens, health care in the Delta region of Mississippi, part of our
country where we need docs--people need help. And he told me about what
it was like to try to practice medicine in a compassionate way. He had
heard a calling, and he went to serve his fellow humans. But liability
insurance drove this Good Samaritan out of the State. He's now, I think,
practicing up in North Dakota or Minnesota. There are some people who
hurt who are lucky to have this good doctor in their midst.
There's a story about the lady--and this happens all the time--in
Nevada named Ruth Valentine. She's pregnant.
She called more than 50 local doctors, and she couldn't find anybody in
Nevada to serve her. So she went to Utah, where she's staying with
friends until she has her baby. No family in America should face this
kind of stress or worry during one of life's most vulnerable moments.
These are just a handful of the stories, which are true and real and
happening all across our country. Twenty percent of the hospitals in
America have had to cut down on certain services, delivering babies or
neurosurgery or orthopedic surgery, because a handful of lawyers have
targeted these procedures for frivolous lawsuits.
At the same time, doctors in hospitals are overusing certain tests
and treatments as defensive measures to avoid litigation. A recent
survey of doctors showed the extent of defensive medicine in America.
Eight out of ten doctors say they have ordered more tests then they need
to. Three of four refer patients to specialists more often than they
believe is medically necessary. Four out of ten prescribe antibiotics
more often then they think is needed. All of this defensive medicine is
rising costs for patients, for States, and for the Federal Government.
The direct cost of liability insurance and the indirect cost from
defensive medicine raise the Federal Government's health care costs by
more than $28 billion a year. When the Federal Government gets hit by
higher medical costs, the taxpayers foot the bill. This is a national
problem; something which affects our budget so significantly requires a
national solution.
We want our legal system to work for our patients. We want people to
have a day in court. Anyone who is harmed at the hands of a doctor
should have a hearing. That's what we want for the justice system. They
should be able to recover the full cost of their care and other economic
losses. If harmed by a doc, they ought to be able to recover their
economic costs, economic losses. They should be able to recover
noneconomic damages as well. But for the sake of the system, noneconomic
damages should be capped at $250,000.
If harm is caused by serious misconduct, patients should also be
able to seek reasonable punitive damages. Without fair and reasonable
limits, the legal system looks more and more like a lottery. And with
the trial lawyers getting as much as 40 percent of the awards and
settlements, it's pretty clear who's holding the winning ticket.
American courts should not be serving the self-interest of personal
injury lawyers; they should be serving the cause of justice and the
needs of Americans' patients.
Last year, thanks to Jim Greenwood
and other Members of Congress, the House of Representatives passed good
medical liability reforms, but the Senate failed to act. Since then, the
problem has only gotten worse. We need to pass medical liability reform
through both Houses. You need to contact your Senators. It doesn't
matter
[[Page 240]]
what political party they're in; you need to contact them. You need to
explain the problem in clear terms. I want to sign good medical
liability reform this year.
Our legal system must address medical errors as well. One of the
best ways to serve patients is to avoid errors and prevent complications
before they become injuries. Doctors and hospitals are constantly
looking for ways to improve patient safety.
Patient safety is improved when doctors and nurses exchange
information about problems and solutions. Yet, in the litigious society
in which we live, many doctors are afraid to discuss these efforts
openly because they're afraid of getting sued. Doctors don't want to put
anything on paper to improve health care quality because it might be
given to a lawyer who is fishing around for a lawsuit. I'm going to ask
Congress to pass a law to make sure that information developed for the
safety and care of patients is not used by lawyers against doctors and
hospitals.
Patient safety also improves when doctors can have access to health
records without delay. When a patient has a medical emergency far from
home, the attending physician should have quick access to that person's
medical records. Yet the health care industry, while progressing in many
areas, has lagged in information technology.
Right now, as you all know better than most, health care records are
kept in different formats--believe it or not, a lot of times on paper--
[laughter]--in files--[laughter]--that can get lost. [Laughter] In the
budget for next year I propose an increase of 53 percent for funding to
help hospitals use information technology to keep better records, to
share that information with doctors so we can continue to improve
patient safety.
Tommy Thompson and his Department are
leading the way, and they're making good use of information technology.
For example, they're using information technology for an online
comparative guide to nursing homes. It's a good use of the Internet.
It's a good way to speak directly to the consumers of America. Families
are now able to compare nursing homes to one another. That makes sense.
There's nothing like enhancing quality by holding people to account.
They're able to compare on measures such as infection rates or how well
patients are progressing in getting on their feet. It's the practical
way to use the information technology.
And that's important, particularly for nursing homes, because our
Nation has accepted a special responsibility for the health of senior
citizens, to make sure that the years of retirement are not years of
hardship, needless hardship. Our Medicare system is a binding commitment
of a caring society. We must renew that commitment by providing the
seniors of today and tomorrow with preventative care and the new
medicines that are transforming health care in our country.
When President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare into law 38 years ago,
he promised a system that would bring the healing miracle of modern
medicine to senior citizens. In 1965, modern medicine almost always
meant physician care inside a hospital. Now modern medicine offers much
more: drug therapies, new medical devices, disease screening, and
preventative care. All seniors and disabled citizens on Medicare should
have access to these advantages. They do not.
Compared to people with private health plans, Medicare patients have
limited choices. Medicare will pay a doctor to perform a heart bypass
operation but will not pay for drugs that could prevent the need for
surgery. Medicare will pay for an amputation but not for the insulin
that could help diabetes patients avoid losing their limbs. Medicare
will pay for chemotherapy and cancer surgery, but after private insurers
made annual mammograms a standard benefit, it took 10 years for Medicare
to do the same and then only because the United States Congress passed a
law. Seniors should not have to wait for an act
[[Page 241]]
of Congress to get effective, modern health care.
Medicare does not protect our seniors from overwhelming hospital
bills. If you have to go to a hospital, Medicare charges you an $840
deductible. After 2 months, you are charged $210 a day. After 3 months,
Medicare charges $420 a day. And after 5 months, Medicare leaves you
with the whole bill.
By comparison, a standard plan for Members of the United States
Congress and other Federal employees charges a copayment of $100 when
you enter the hospital and not a dollar more, no matter how long you
have to stay. Medicare is supposed to protect the savings of our
seniors. In many cases, it doesn't.
I recently went out to Grand Rapids, Michigan, and met Pat
Wahl. She suffers from rheumatoid arthritis. That
requires expensive medicine. She lost her husband in the year 2000. She
lost his health coverage. She had to depend entirely on Medicare. Soon
her medical bills began to exceed her income, and she was forced to sell
her house.
This is an incredibly sad story, when you think about it; certainly
sad listening to Pat in Grand Rapids. They're
unnecessary stories. We can and we must improve Medicare and protect our
seniors from runaway health care costs.
Medicare reform is a large and complicated task. People have strong
opinions on this matter, and we will need broad cooperation to move
forward. We're working closely--I say ``we''--my administration and
Tommy and members of my staff and members
of his staff are working closely with good and serious-minded leaders in
both Houses, leaders such as Senators Frist and
Grassley and Breaux, Speaker Hastert, Dennis and
Congressmen Thomas and Tauzin. J.
``Billy'' We share a basic commitment to get something done,
and we share a commitment to these goals of reform.
A modern Medicare system must offer more choices and better benefits
to every senior--all seniors. All seniors should have help in buying
prescription drugs. Those who can least afford them should have extra
help. Seniors should be protected from out-of-control premium increases.
And all seniors should be able to chose the health care plan that best
fits their needs without being forced into an HMO.
The element of choice is essential. When a bureaucracy is in charge
of granting benefits, new benefits usually come slowly and grudgingly,
if at all. When insurance providers compete for a patient's business,
they offer new treatments and services quickly. If they don't, the
patient--the customer--will look for better services elsewhere. Because
it is in the best interests of providers to have healthy customers,
patients will get the quality care they need.
The framework for Medicare reform I'm releasing today would give
seniors the freedom to select one of three broad opportunities. First,
seniors who are happy with the current Medicare system should be able to
stay in the system and receive help for prescription drugs. To reform
the current system, I propose we issue a discount card that will reduce
the cost of prescription drugs for every senior by 10 to 25 percent. We
will provide an annual $600 subsidy to low-income seniors to pay for
prescription drugs. And we will set annual limits on the amount seniors
will have to spend out of pocket on drugs at no additional premium.
Second, seniors who want more coverage will be able to choose an
enhanced form of Medicare. This option will include full coverage for
preventative care, a comprehensive prescription drug benefit, protection
against high out-of-pocket costs, and extra help for low-income seniors
to be able to get the drug benefit. Seniors will be able to choose their
specialists, their hospitals, and their primary doctors. The fee-for-
service arrangement would offer seniors similar kinds of choices now
enjoyed by the Members of Congress, who are given a broad choice among
competing health
[[Page 242]]
care plans. What is good for the public servants, including Members of
the House and Senate, is good for America's seniors.
Third, seniors who want the kind of benefits available in managed
care plans, including prescription drug coverage, will have that choice
as well. This option would place seniors in an affordable network of
doctors, provide drug coverage, and allow seniors to keep their out-of-
pocket costs to a minimum.
Moving toward this system will take time, and as we make these
changes, all American seniors will receive a prescription drug discount
card to use right away. And low-income seniors will be eligible
immediately for the annual $600 Medicare prescription benefit.
Leaders of both political parties have talked for years about this
issue, about adding a prescription drug benefit to Medicare. And the
time for action is now. The budget I submitted will commit an additional
$400 billion over that which we have already committed to, over the next
decade to implement this vision of a stronger Medicare system. We are
committed to reform; we are committed to funding the reforms.
We have a responsibility--the docs, those of us in elected office,
America's seniors--to work together to make sure Medicare fulfills its
promise for this generation and for generations to come.
Our Medicare system depends on the skill and dedication of
physicians. You know that. And that dedication should be fairly
compensated. As Yank Jr. mentioned, we work with
Congress to protect doctors from deep cuts in Medicare disbursements.
Effective this past Saturday, instead of a 4.4-percent reduction in
Medicare payments, docs will receive a 1.6-percent increase. This
increase is a sign of confidence in our doctors, and I hope that all of
you will show your confidence in Medicare by staying in the system.
Medicare needs you. Our seniors need you.
Whether the issue is reforming Medicare, enhancing patient safety,
or correcting abuses in the legal system, the stakes are high. We must
make sure that the choices of patients and the judgment of doctors are
at the center of American health care. We must preserve the great
innovation and quality of private medicine. We must keep our commitments
to the elderly, and help bring the healing miracle of modern medicine to
the people who need it in our time.
All of you as members of the medical profession exercise that
healing power and uphold a great trust. I appreciate the work you do.
You have my respect. And in the days ahead, I look forward to working
with you on these needed reforms. May God bless your work. And may God
continue to bless America.
Note: The President spoke at 10 a.m. in the International Ballroom at
the Washington Hilton Hotel. In his remarks, he referred to President
Saddam Hussein of Iraq; and Dr. Yank Coble, Jr., president, Dr. Michael
D. Maves, executive vice president, and Dr. J. Edward Hill, chair of the
board of trustees, American Medical Association. The Office of the Press
Secretary also released a Spanish language transcript of these remarks.