Arlen Specter: “I agree with the general delineation that it was a medically reviewable decision. That is called ``quality of care,'' as…”

“I agree with the general delineation that it was a medically reviewable decision. That is called ``quality of care,'' as I have said before, and is a malpractice issue. But the question which I have directed to the Senator from Massachusetts is a much narrower question. To repeat, is this not a question on the interpretation of the contracts, specifically where an item of service is covered under the terms and conditions of the plan for coverage? That is my question. The interpretation of ``an item of service is covered under the terms and conditions of the plan for coverage'' is a matter for the Federal court. I believe it is plain from the language on 139 to 141 that it is a Federal matter. But if you move to an interpretation of what is medical malpractice or a breach of duty by a doctor on what is a medically reviewable decision, then that is a matter which goes to the State courts. And this legislation does not continue the preemption of existing law.”