On the recordFebruary 18, 2011
I thank the gentleman. Mr. Chairman, one thing that is lost in this debate is this fact, and that is there is a difference between coverage and access to care. I have been a physician for 35 years. I can tell you that today, pre- ObamaCare, we have 85 percent coverage, but we have 100 percent access to care. Anyone who wishes can report to any emergency room in this country and receive care. Now, they may receive a bill, but if they pay that bill or not, they can still return for care. Now let's move to Canada and the U.K. where they have supposedly 100 percent of coverage. Well, they oftentimes wait a year, maybe 2 years, for a CT scan or an MRI scan, and then once they get the results back, they may wait another year to get surgery. {time} 1110 It's not unusual to be told, hey, we could have helped you had we made the diagnosis in time. It's perfectly acceptable in these countries to have a death rate from lack of treatment. Look at the death rates from cancer, prostate, breast cancer in our country versus others; a horrific difference. Why? Because we diagnose it much earlier; we treat it much more aggressively. But if we go forward with this ObamaCare, then what we will have is budgets coming up against the decision on what type of care our citizens can receive. We'll be taking it out of insurance companies; but, yes, we'll also be putting it in the hands of the government. Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens).
