On the recordMarch 21, 2012
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to H.R. 5. It combines two very bad ideas into one terrible bill that is anti-senior, anti-consumer, and anti-health. It's no accident that we're considering the legislation during the second anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, because this is a thinly veiled, partisan attempt to confuse the public and obscure the law's success in covering young people, reducing costs for seniors, and providing improved health benefits. Title I of the bill before us, the medical malpractice provisions, have been around for over a decade. They have not been enacted under Democratic or Republican Congresses and Presidents because they are an extreme intrusion on the authority of the States to set their own liability rules and would shield bad actors from accountability when they cause injury and death. Let's be clear: this bill is much broader than traditional medical malpractice legislation. It protects manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, marketers, even promoters of health care products. And it gives them protection even if they intentionally cause harm. Insurance companies and HMOs are protected as well. The bill shields drug and device manufacturers with complete immunity from punitive damages, no matter how reckless their conduct, so long as their products were at one time approved by the FDA. This bill preempts State action in an area that has traditionally been left to the States.…





