Last year, Congress voted on several different versions of patient protection legislation. Even the most comprehensive patient protection legislation would not help them. I did, however, support legislation which would have given patients many of the same protections, but would put them in the doctor's office rather than the courtroom and protected employers from frivolous lawsuits. The substitute legislation I supported, commonly known as the coalition bill, would have allowed patients to sue their insurer if they were hurt because their insurer refused to approve a covered procedure. The difference, however, is that H.R. 2723 would have also put employers who offer health care coverage at risk for being sued.
Employers voluntarily offer health insurance benefits to their employees.
If they believe their business is threatened because they offer health care, this employee benefit may be eliminated because of liability concerns. Since there are already 44 million Americans without health insurance, even the best patient protection legislation won't help them. I believe that it is more important to get patients the care they need than to put them in the courtroom. Both H.R. 2723 and the coalition alternative require insurers to establish an appeals process for denied benefits which includes an independent panel. H.R. 2723 would have allowed patients to skip this process and go directly to the courtroom rather than the doctor's office.