Shadegg/Coburn Proposal Helps Lawyers, Hurts
Consumers
Aug 25, 1999
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 25, 1999
CONTACT: Richard Coorsh
(202) 824-1787
e-mail:rcoorsh@hiaa.org
The following statement was released today by Donald Young, M.D.,
Chief Operating Officer and Medical Director of the Health Insurance
Association of America (HIAA):
Representatives John Shadegg (R-AZ) and Tom Coburn (R-OK) are
drafting a so-called "patient protection" bill that instead will
provide Members of Congress with political protection at the expense
of consumers. Sadly, despite ample evidence to the contrary, both
continue to insist that their so-called "Health Care Quality and
Choice Act" would not raise costs. In fact, their bill would impose
additional government mandates – the cost of which would be passed
on to consumers in the form of higher premiums – even though both
belong to a political party that normally eschews expanding
government.
Make no mistake. Mandates – no matter how well intended – raise
the cost of health insurance. Already, nearly one quarter of the
nation’s 43 million uninsured Americans lack coverage because the
cost of mandates. The Shadegg/Coburn proposal, under the guise of
quality improvement, would mandate a process that would allow trial
lawyers to sue health plans. This would add more fuel to the cost
inflation fire, and would benefit trial lawyers without improving
the overall quality of care. If Reps. Shadegg and Coburn truly are
interested in improving the quality of care, they should instead
support the efforts of managed care plans to provide "best
practices" information to providers and to eliminate the wide
disparity that exists in the way that different doctors treat the
same conditions.
In addition to benefiting the trial lawyers, the Shadegg/Coburn
bill would impose other costly mandates. For example, the bill would
mandate that health plans pay for out-of-network care delivered
after a medical emergency, and would mandate that health plans
provide an out-of-network option to people with certain kinds of HMO
coverage. These options may sound good on paper, but in the real
world they cost money at a time when consumers are eager to see
their coverage costs reduced.
The private health insurance industry cannot provide consumers
with lower cost coverage in the face of ever-expanding government
mandates and escalating medical and prescription drug costs.
Representatives Shadegg and Coburn should not attempt to gloss over
how their legislation would raise consumers’ costs, and to remember
that cost is the primary reason why most of the nation’s 43 million
uninsured lack coverage.
### <
|