Patients’ Rights Spurs ‘Passionate’ Debate in Subcommittee

Members of the House Energy and Commerce health subcommittee engaged in a "passionate and extensive debate" over patients' rights legislation yesterday, illustrating "how far apart both sides remain" on the issue, CongressDaily/A.M. reports. Discussions on the McCain-Kennedy-Edwards patients' rights bill (S 283) centered on some of the legislation's "most contentious issues," including whether employers should be shielded from lawsuits (Rovner, CongressDaily/A.M., 3/16). Some business groups have expressed concern about the McCain-Kennedy-Edwards bill because they say it would open employers to being sued by employees over denial of care issues (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 2/7). Rep. Greg Ganske (R-Iowa), a co-sponsor of the House version of the McCain-Kennedy-Edwards bill (HR 526), said the bill would protect employers. "We made a good-faith effort to move towards employers on this, and once again, they stepped away and moved the goalpost," he said. Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) disagreed, stating that whether an employer is directly involved in a medical decision -- the "threshold for a lawsuit" under the legislation -- "is a question of fact," meaning that the bill would "subject employers to a process that would be decided by a jury." Other opponents of the bill added that lawsuits would likely prompt employers to stop covering their workers. Energy and Commerce Chair Bill Tauzin (R-La.) said, "We do not want legislation whose cure is worse than the problem."

Federal or State Courts?
Lawmakers also addressed whether state or federal courts should hear lawsuits (CongressDaily/A.M., 3/16). Under the McCain-Kennedy-Edwards bill, patients could sue HMOs in state court for denial of benefits or quality of care issues and in federal court for non-quality of care issues, such as those involving violations of health plan contracts. The bill would cap civil assessments awarded in federal court at $5 million, but state courts could award as much in damages as state laws allow. However, under the recently introduced Breaux-Frist patients' rights bill, nearly all cases would be tried in federal courts (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 3/14). Subcommittee ranking member Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said that allowing only federal courts to decide such issues would "strip power from the patient and restore unfair protections to health plans." Tauzin, however, said that Congress should "remain within the parameters" set by President Bush, who maintains that federal courts should hear all care denial lawsuits. Tauzin added that Congress should follow Bush's recommendations "both because they are right and because we need legislation he will sign in the end" (Rovner, CongressDaily/A.M., 3/16). To listen to an audio recording of this meeting, go to http://www.house.gov/commerce/hearings/03152001-110/03152001.htm. Note: You must have RealPlayer to listen to this clip.