Poll Finds More Americans Back Democrats Than Bush With Respect to Patients’ Rights

Forty-nine percent of Americans "trust" congressional Democrats on the issue of patients' rights legislation, compared to 34% who trust President Bush, according to a new Gallup poll. The survey also found that the issue ranks second among "congressional priorities," with more than 80% of respondents saying that "getting a patients' bill of rights passed is extremely or very important" (Gallup.com, 6/12).

Fire in the Hole?
Meanwhile, Roll Call reports that Rep. Charles Norwood (R-Ga.) "is about to drop a legislative bomb on the White House" by signaling his support for a patients' rights proposal from Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John Edwards (D-N.C.) (S 283), which President Bush has threatened to veto. A private memo by Norwood aide John Stone, sent to 35 House members involved in the patients' rights debate, states: "After working with our new White House and leadership since February, [Norwood] has been unable to reach any reasonable compromise on patients' rights. He has offered every possible concession on every provision, without a single reciprocation by the administration." President Bush supports a proposal from Sens. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), James Jeffords (I-Vt.) and John Breaux (D-La.) (S 889), which would offer a less expansive right to sue health plans than the Kennedy-McCain-Edwards bill. Stone told Roll Call that Norwood's support for the latter will "spell the end" of the Frist-Jeffords-Breaux measure. "It's dead on arrival. It's not even worth bring up on the Senate floor," he said (Henry, Roll Call, 6/11). The Frist-Breaux-Jeffords bill would afford all patients with private health insurance a "slender" right to sue their health plans after exhausting an appeals process by an outside review panel. Patients could only sue health plans in federal court, not state court, and awards would be capped at $500,000. The law allows states that have a patients' rights law in place to be exempt from the federal law if they can prove that the state law's provisions are "consistent with federal law" (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 5/16). The McCain-Kennedy-Edwards bill would allow patients to 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 their health plan's contract. Damages awarded in federal court would be capped at $5 million, but state courts could award as much money in damages as the state allows (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 2/7).