What about scope? The scope proposal in our bill applies to every single ERISA-covered plan. Every employer-sponsored plan would have an external appeal because that is ERISA. It has Federal remedies. We also included in this proposal a cause of action, a cause of action liability. In case the external appeal overturns the HMO and they do not pay, we say you can sue the HMO. We did not have that in the bill before. We did not have liability. We compromised. Some say the conference has not done anything. We made a concession. We have liability in our proposal so patients can sue HMOs. It turns out that a lot of our colleagues want to sue more, on every case. They want to turn this into an invitation for litigation. We do not. We do have cause of action. We have remedies allowing patients to go after the HMO, and, frankly, the employer, if acting as the HMO, if they are the final decisionmaker, if they are the ones denying health care, if they are the ones causing injury, harm, damage, or death, because of their decision to deny health care, they can be held liable. My point being: We have moved forward in the conference. We have made compromises.
Don Nickles: “What about scope? The scope proposal in our bill applies to every single ERISA-covered plan. Every employer-sponsored…”
On the recordJune 29, 2000
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the scope and liability provisions of a healthcare bill during a floor debate.
Share
More from Don Nickles
Sep 14, 2004
I will make a few comments concerning the Baucus amendment requesting $2.65 billion of drought assistance. I have two or three comments. One, it doesn't belong on this bill. This is the Homeland Security bill. This is not an agriculture…
Jun 11, 2012
When we reduce capital gains and corporate dividends to 15 percent, we actually raise more money for the Federal Government.
Oct 10, 2004
I am not sure it is written that way. I am not sure it is a requirement that an employer has to give the money immediately to a service man or woman. I suspect that is your intent. I don't believe that is the way the amendment is written…





