House votes down modest HMO bill

Thursday, Oct. 7, 1999 | 11:28 a.m.

SUN STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS

WASHINGTON -- House members today rejected the most modest of four competing patient-protection bills as they confronted the politically charged issue of HMOs and whether injured Americans should be allowed to sue them.

Managed care has dominated the health debate on Capitol Hill all year, as Congress responds to voters' frustration over cost cutting and fears they may be denied needed care.

Casting their first votes on the politically hot topic, the House defeated, 284-145, a bill sponsored by Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, which would have given patients no new rights to file lawsuits. Federal law now effectively bans such suits for millions of Americans, even if they are injured or die because of an HMO's decision.

Nevada's two House members differ somewhat in their stances in today's patient's rights debate. Rep. Shelley Berkley, a Democrat, fully supports the heavily Democrat-backed Norwood-Dingell bill.

So does Rep. Jim Gibbons, a Republican. Gibbons is even an original co-sponsor of the bill.

But Gibbons, along with several other Republican House members, have created a new faction, crafting an amendment that they plan to push today. Theirs is one of three alternative proposals to Norwood-Dingell.

The most pronounced difference between the new plan Gibbons supports, called the Houghton-Graham after principal sponsors Rep. Amo Houghton, R-N.Y., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is that Norwood-Dingell allows people more leverage to sue for unlimited sums when an HMO denies them care. The Gibbons-backed plan limits lawsuit awards to $500,000. It also limits people to suing in federal, not state, courts.

Gibbons, Houghton and Graham assembled for a late afternoon press conference at the Capitol on Wednesday, the eve of today's likely vote on the issue.

Gibbons said he was willing to part with the majority of his party in the interest of creating health care reform that was "meaningful and balanced."

"This is an issue about bringing people in Congress together to solve these problems," Gibbons said. "We're here to build on bipartisanship that started with this (Norwood-Dingell) bill."

Conservative Republicans and their allies in the business and insurance industries preferred this bill, but Democrats and many Republicans felt it didn't go far enough.

"It does not hold insurance companies accountable when they make medical decisions that harm people," said Rep. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Meanwhile, hoping to keep Democrats united, President Clinton today sent a letter to Capitol Hill restating his strong support for a broad bill that would give patients a host of new rights, including broad new rights to sue.

Democratic leaders fear that concerns over how to pay for it may cost them votes.

On Wednesday, the House approved, largely along party lines, a GOP-written package of tax breaks and other provisions meant to help people without insurance obtain coverage. Democrats balked, saying the bill would cost the Treasury $48 billion over 10 years but help only a fraction of the uninsured.