Opponents of House-Backed Patients’ Bill of Rights
Cry ‘Federal Power Grab’
By John Millrany - August 3, 2001HMOs (health management organizations) are still a work in progress, but a vote in the House Aug. 2 might signal a definitive turn in how health care for nearly 200 million Americans with health coverage will ultimately be delivered.
In a victory for President Bush, the House voted 226-203 on its version of the Patients' Bill of Rights, which, while splitting the two parties, appears to be popular with the country at large.
The Thursday night session clears the way for compromise talks later this fall on a crucial issue that has stymied lawmakers for more than five years.
One of the key arguments-with particular interest to Californians-is Independent Review of Plan Decisions. According to U.S. Newswire, California patients who today have a right to recover unlimited damages against an HMO under a state liability law would be limited to recovering $1.5 million for their pain and suffering and in punitive damages under the Charles Norwood (R-GA) amendment voted by the House.
"In addition, an independent review law set up in California would be undermined by the Norwood-sponsored legislation because HMOs that use the review process and prevail would be extended a presumption of innocence in California courts that does not exist today," the wire service said.
"This compromise is not just a give-away to the HMO industry, but a take-away from the states," said Jamie Court, executive director of the Santa Monica-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumers, sponsors of California's HMO liability law. (The foundation is a non-profit consumer watchdog group.)
"Californians that can now recover unlimited damages against HMOs that deliberately kill or maim their loved ones would be strictly limited under the Norwood-Bush deal," he said. "Texans who can recover unlimited non-economic damages today for their pain and suffering would be restricted to no more than $1.5 million as well.
"In Texas, there is only a cap on punitive damages, meant to punish, not compensatory damages, designed to make the patient whole. This amendment is a federal power grab that does great violence to the hard work done in state houses across (the nation) during the last half-dozen years. It should be dead on arrival in the Senate," Court added.
Senate Majority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-MO) may agree with Court, calling the House-voted legislation "a hollow bill."
Passage of the bill "was a mere formality after a tense, party-line roll call on which the House softened the bill's legal liability provisions to ratify a compromise that Bush and (and Norwood) sealed scarcely 24 hours earlier in the Oval Office," reported David Epso of AP.
"Like it or not, we have to work with the president, who has to sign this bill," Norwood said.
"In a daylong debate," Epso wrote, "dozens of Democrats attacked the provision as a surrender to HMOs. But Norwood insisted that critics 'are deluding themselves if they think they can force a bill down the president's face.'"
Republicans sent a cheer up from the House floor when the vote was announced, Epso reported. "Chants of 'Nor-wood, Nor-wood' were audible above the din of the packed chamber. Only three Democrats supported the bill, but only six Republicans defected and opposed it."
Said Gephardt, "I'm amazed at how much in league with the HMOs and insurance companies the Republicans are."
Asked whether Republicans had left themselves room to compromise further in final negotiations, Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) said, "There has to be." He said Bush would "remain engaged throughout the process" and called on the Democrat-controlled Senate not to "torpedo this thing." | 
__May11th2017.gif)
