I wish very much that we had more time to see the language of the Norwood amendment so people could fully understand it. I intend to support the rule. I understand fully how my colleagues on the other side of the aisle very well are upset about this, but I feel it is time to move on with this debate. I thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle who throughout the last 5 or 6 years have stood up as protectors of patients and have been very interested in this.
Greg Ganske: “I wish very much that we had more time to see the language of the Norwood amendment so people could fully understand it.…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the Patients' Bill of Rights and the Norwood amendment during a House floor speech.
Share
More from Greg Ganske
And would the gentleman say that the reason for that is that his bill is focusing primarily on the initial creation of this blastocyst or the equivalent of a fertilized egg and the problems that that would have because we would be…
The events of yesterday, September 11, are forever seared into our minds as with branding irons. We grieve for the victims and their families. We pray for them. Let the word go forth to our enemies. We are united in our resolve to avenge…
The underlying Ganske-Dingell bill does have access provisions that I think are bipartisan, for instance, 100 percent deductibility for the self-insured and other small business provisions to help increase access. There will be an…
So he stands by his statement that HMOs are treated better in his amendment than others. Now, is it the gentleman's understanding that his bill would abrogate State laws on patients' rights?





