In today’s CongressBlog, Phil opines on the importance of medical liability reform:

As a practicing Obstetrician-Gynecologist for nearly 30 years, I’ve seen how frivolous lawsuits drive up the cost of medical malpractice insurance, forcing many doctors out of business.  Already, brain trauma patients are suffering as emergency rooms scramble to find on-call specialists or transfer patients to other hospitals. Women are forced to cross state lines just to deliver a baby or find prenatal care.  Rural communities are left without hospitals.

America is home to the finest physicians and healthcare technology in the world.  Stories like this shouldn’t happen here.

Today’s medical tort system is designed for lawyers, not patients.  It allows trial lawyers to file overly-expansive suits to increase payouts.  The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently reported that the average award in medical malpractice cases has risen 76% in recent years. There are hidden costs, too. Doctors are forced to practice defensive medicine, ordering unnecessary tests to protect against future lawsuits.  HHS estimates defensive medicine costs us between $70 billion and $126 billion a year, raising the price of healthcare for everyone.

We need to make America’s medical tort system work for America’s patients.  As we’ve seen in California and other states across our nation, medical liability reform works.  In 2001, states without reform saw insurance premiums rise by three times as much as states that had enacted reform.

This week, I am introducing the HEALTH Act.  This legislation will ensure Americans have access to physicians and emergency care, while providing for a fair and timely reparations process for those who have been wronged.

The HEALTH Act abolishes the financial incentives for filing frivolous lawsuits.  Patients will still be able to recover the full cost of economic damages, such as medical bills and lost income; those who have been wronged deserve fair compensation. But this measure would put reasonable limits on run-away non-economic damages, and does not permit punitive damages unless an actual economic judgment is rendered. The bill even maximizes patient awards by allowing courts to ensure an unjust portion of the patient’s recovery is not misdirected to an attorney.

We must act now on this important legislation.

Click HERE to read the complete post.

Most of us know that Methamphetamine abuse is having a devastating effect on our citizens and communities.  But did you know that important research into this crisis is taking place right here in Georgia? Kennesaw State University was recently awarded a grant through the National Institute on Drug Abuse to study the problem of methamphetamine abuse in our nation’s suburbs.  The researchers won’t have to look far; after all, one of the largest methamphetamine busts in the nation took place in Smyrna. I am proud that Kennesaw State is helping lead the effort to study this problem and how we can fight it.  The battle against drugs is a community-wide effort, and we have to examine ways to reduce abuse through prevention, treatment, supply reduction and law enforcement.

Click HERE to learn about the new Congressional Drug Policy Caucus, of which Phil is a founding member.  For a complete list of Phil’s caucuses, click HERE.

On Friday, Phil joined Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-TX) in introducing bipartisan legislation to encourage the adoption of health information technology. These technologies, like electronic medical records and e-prescribing, can help reduce medical errors and save lives. Healthcare IT News reports on the bill HERE. You can also read more about the legislation in this press release.

I am proud to have joined Lifetime Television in its effort to end violence against women. In the photograph above, I’m wearing a special tie, designed by singer Christina Aguilera, to show his support for this important cause.

We need to remind abused women across America that help is available. By standing as a community against this abuse, we can make it easier for women to come forward and get the assistance they need. According to the National Domestic Violence Hotline, nearly one in four women will experience domestic violence in her lifetime.

To learn more about domestic violence or to get help, visit the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence website (www.ncadv.org) or call the National Domestic Violence Hotline (800-799-SAFE).

Senate Democrats today failed to gain enough support to force a vote on legislation that would allow government price controls in the Medicare prescription drug program. Phil adamantly opposes this misguided legislation, because it’s the marketplace that has kept prices low and choices vast for our seniors. The Wall Street Journal this morning (subscription required) makes the case against this legislation.

[T]here’s no denying the program’s innovation of using private-sector competition has worked far better than critics predicted. In the first year alone, the cost of Medicare Part D came in 30% below projections. The Congressional Budget Office calculates the 10-year cost of Medicare Part D will be a whopping $265 billion below original estimates.

Seniors are also saving money under this private competition model. Premiums for the drug benefit were expected to average $37 a month. Instead, premiums this year are averaging $22 a month — a more than 40% saving. Democrats don’t like to be reminded that many of them wanted to lock in premiums at $35 a month back in 2003. No wonder recent polls find that about 80% of seniors say they’re satisfied with their new Medicare drug benefits.

Democrats who opposed all of this private competition now say that government-negotiated prices will do even better. They must have missed the new study by the Lewin Group, the health policy consulting firm, which found that federal insurance programs that impose price controls typically hold down costs by refusing to cover some of the most routinely prescribed medicines for seniors. These include treatments for high cholesterol, arthritis, heartburn and glaucoma.

…Supporters of federal price “negotiations” — really, an imposed price — also like to point to the example of the Veterans Health Administration, which negotiates prices directly with drug companies…Here’s the real kicker: Statistics released March 22 by the VHA and Department of Health and Human Services show that 1.16 million seniors who are already enrolled in the VHA drug program have nonetheless signed up for Medicare Part D. That’s about one-third of the entire VHA case load. Why? Because these seniors have figured out that Medicare Part D offers more convenience, often lower prices, and better insurance coverage for their prescription drugs. In short, seniors are voting with their feet against the very price control system that Democratic leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi want to push them into.

For the complete article, click HERE. For more on why Phil opposes this legislation, click HERE.

The Campaign for Children’s Health recently honored two 11th District students who showed great insight into the importance of access to health coverage for our children. These students won a state-wide essay contest discussing children’s health. As you may know, Congress is working to reauthorize the S-CHIP program, which in Georgia is known as PeachCare. The state of Georgia has done an exemplary job enrolling children in the PeachCare program, and this essay contest underlines the importance of that effort.

Winning the ages 9-13 competition was Kalley McMuller, a 7th grader from Marietta. Kalley wrote:

“My brother Trent has been very blessed to have a wide variety of doctors available. He has fractured several bones, including his wrist, arm, pinky finger, and thumb…. A broken bone may be a minor injury to Trent, but for numerous children out there, a broken bone is a major and devastating setback…. Around the world, many young people do not have the luxury of healthcare, but every single child is worthy of it.”

Winning the ages 14-18 competition was Casey Butler, a senior from Cartersville. Casey wrote:

“I am a senior in high school and I am doing an apprenticeship at a local medical facility… The problem of a lack of health care compounds itself. A small problem such as a fever or something, if left untreated, could escalate to maybe pneumonia or bronchitis. This is unfortunate because if the problem was treated to begin with and caught by a health care professional them it would not have gone to the extreme of one of these problems.”

Congratulations to Kalley and Casey for their thoughtful insight on the health of our children.

In today’s Washington Examiner, Sigrid Fry-Revere, the director of bioethics studies at the Cato Institute, opines that Phil’s legislation prohibiting federal funding for mandatory state human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programs deserves “kudos”:

Both whether such a vaccine should be mandated and the value of administering it in the first place have come under scrutiny. Gingrey’s legislation would inject some honest discussion into a debate that has been skewed by financial interests, both on the part of state governments and vaccine companies.

The op-ed continued:

As Gingrey so aptly points out, the efforts to pass mandatory HPV vaccination laws are “unprecedented and unacceptable.” But then, why is there such a huge push to pass such laws?

… According to state records, Merck’s lobbying efforts to convince lawmakers to make its HPV vaccine mandatory total $500,000 in New York , $40,000 in Virginia, and $150,000 to $250,000 in Texas. Merck refuses to reveal what it has spent lobbying for Gardasil, but with time its contributions in other states will undoubtedly also become public. Whatever the eventual total, there is a great deal of money at issue, and it is self-evident that no one spends that kind of money unless they anticipate huge financial gains…

It’s time for state legislatures to stop letting money do the talking and listen to their consciences. The HPV vaccine is new, expensive and relatively untested. It may have unknown or unintended consequences…

So kudos to Gingrey. With all that we don’t know, and what little we do, parents, not states, should be weighing the costs and benefits of vaccinating their children against HPV.

To read more about Phil’s legislation, click HERE. For the complete Examiner op-ed, click HERE.

Today’s Washington Times reports on Phil’s legislation to incentivize states to pass voluntary – not mandatory – HPV vaccination programs.

A Georgia member of Congress yesterday introduced legislation to prohibit federal money from being used by states to make vaccines against the human papillomavirus (HPV) mandatory for school-age children.

“Mandating the HPV vaccination is both unprecedented and unacceptable,” said Rep. Phil Gingrey, a Republican, who is an obstetrician and gynecologist.  “Whether or not girls get vaccinated against HPV is a decision for parents and physicians, not state governments.”

Because HPV is unlike communicable diseases such as measles and mumps, which children are routinely vaccinated against, Mr. Gingrey said HPV vaccines should be taken voluntarily.

The article continues:

Mr. Gingrey’s hope is to persuade states to take a voluntary approach rather than mandatory by blocking the use of any federal funds for the expensive vaccine, which costs about $400 for a series of three shots. […]

“If this bill were enacted, it would signal the end of state vaccine mandates [for HPV],” said Lawrence Gostin, director of the Center for Law and the Public’s Health at Johns Hopkins and Georgetown universities.

To read the Washington Times article, click HERE. For more on Phil’s legislation, click HERE.

This week, the Wall Street Journal (subscription required) ran an excellent column by Robert George, a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics, and Thomas Berg titled “Six Stem Cell Facts.”  The column sets the record straight on embryonic stem cell research. During the heated and emotional debate over this research that destroys human embryos, the facts are not being treated with the intellectual honesty they deserve. These two authors counter some common misconceptions about embryonic research:

There is no “ban” on human embryonic stem cell research in the United States.

This has been arguably the most muddled point in the entire debate. ESC research goes on at labs throughout the country, with no legal barriers to prohibit such research or the private financing of it. The federal government has funded ESC research to the tune of $130 million dollars since 2001, and the U.S. continues to be the international leader in the field. Out of all peer-reviewed research papers published from 1998 through 2005 on original human ESC research, scientists from the U.S. published by far the most, 125 of the 315.

They also note:

We are a long way away from therapies derived from embryonic stem cells.

James Thomson, the first scientist to derive stem cells from a human embryo, made this point clearly just a few weeks ago: “I don’t want to sound too pessimistic because this is all doable, but it’s going to be very hard.” He added, “those transplantation therapies should work but it’s likely to take a long time.” Leading British stem cell expert Lord Winston has been even more blunt: “I am not entirely convinced that embryonic stem cells will, in my lifetime, and possibly anybody’s lifetime, for that matter, be holding quite the promise that we desperately hope they will.”

There are currently no controlled human clinical trials underway for ESC-derived therapies. By contrast, there are currently some 1200 clinical trials underway associated with human adult stem cells (ASCs). While most treatments derived so far from ASC research apply to blood-related diseases, the broader application of ASCs for a more diverse array of maladies is likely within several more years.

There are non-controversial alternatives worth exploring.

It is increasingly clear that there are non-embryo destructive research alternatives that hold out the promise of providing sources of stem cells with properties equivalent to, or nearly equivalent to, embryonic cells. Such alternatives include, among others, the reprogramming of ordinary somatic (body) cells, the derivation of stem cells from amniotic fluid, and (assuming that it can be shown that the product is not an embryo), altered nuclear transfer.

Finally, the authors comment:

We fervently share the desire for cures, but we believe that biomedical science compromises its own integrity when it destroys human life in the cause of trying to save it.

As a pro-life OB/GYN physician, Phil only supports ethical stem cell research that doesn’t sacrifice human life. To read about legislation he has introduced to support life AND science, click HERE.

The Washington Times today ran Phil’s letter to the editor criticizing mandatory HPV vaccination.

Phil explained:

As an OB-GYN physician myself, I applaud the development of this vaccine. But as a father, I don’t want to see important health care choices taken away from doctors, parents and patients — and handed over to state bureaucrats. Unlike measles and other communicable diseases, students can’t get HPV from sharing a juice box at lunch or playing on the jungle gym during recess. As HPV falls well outside the appropriate criteria for mandatory vaccination, I have introduced legislation in Congress to prohibit federal dollars from funding mandatory state HPV vaccination programs… While states should certainly help families afford this new drug, parents should be free to choose if vaccination is right for their daughters. We can’t cede this important health care choice to overzealous state legislatures. 

To read the complete letter, click HERE. For more on this issue, click HERE.

In today’s Atlanta Journal Constitution, Phil opines on S.B. 155, legislation introduced in the Georgia state Senate to make HPV vaccination mandatory for all sixth-grade girls.  Phil notes:

[T]he Georgia Legislature would be wrong to implement a mandatory vaccination program for our sixth-grade girls… As a father, physician and member of Congress, I firmly believe parents, not politicians, should be making health care decisions for our children.

His reasoning?

In Georgia, public school students must be vaccinated against a variety of diseases, from measles and mumps to polio and rubella. These diseases pose communicable health threats; vaccination is mandatory to protect our children from the sneezes and coughs of infected schoolmates.

But HPV is not a communicable disease; it is a sexually transmitted disease, one that is passed not through casual contact, but through sexual behavior. In short, our students aren’t at risk of catching HPV by sharing a juice box at lunch or playing tag during recess.

Because of this critical distinction, it is both inappropriate and unprecedented to mandate vaccination for HPV. The Georgia Legislature would do a grave disservice to parents across our state by allowing the government to unnecessarily take a health care decision away from our families.

Phil concludes:

There any many reasons parents might oppose vaccinating their children, from religious objections to age-appropriateness to concerns over side effects and adverse reactions. Whatever the reason, it is a discussion for the doctor’s office, not the statehouse.

When we assume that elected officials better know the health care needs of our children than do their own parents, we risk turning over the care of our loved ones to the whims of our government.

To read the complete Op-Ed, click HERE. To read more about legislation Phil introduced to combat this growing trend, click HERE.

I welcomed the news that drug manufacturer Merck is no longer lobbying state governments to require human-papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations for school children. The FDA recently approved Merck’s HPV vaccine, Gardasil, and the company had been encouraging state legislators (22 so far) to introduce bills requiring HPV vaccination for all sixth-grade girls. I recently introduced legislation opposing this mandatory vaccination.  While I believe an HPV vaccination is a wonderful development, mandatory state vaccination programs are traditionally reserved for communicable and highly-contagious diseases, like the measles.  As a sexually transmitted disease, HPV does not fit that definition, and mandatory programs take important healthcare choices away from patients, parents and physicians.

The Wall Street Journal today reports:

Merck & Co. said it would stop lobbying states to pass laws requiring that preteen girls be vaccinated against cervical cancer in the face of a growing backlash among parents, physicians and consumer advocates.

Merck’s aggressive lobbying campaign was intended to boost sales of its Gardasil vaccine, which received Food and Drug Administration approval last year. Gardasil provides protection against two strains of the human papillomavirus that are thought to cause the majority of cervical-cancer cases. But, unlike a number of diseases against which U.S. schoolchildren are required to be vaccinated, HPV is not an airborne virus that can spread easily in a group setting. Rather, it is sexually transmitted. Gardasil also stands apart from other vaccines that are compulsory because of its high cost: $360 for the required three-dose regimen.

The article also notes the growing opposition to mandatory programs:

In recent weeks, opposition to state mandates has grown among parents who want the freedom to make such a medical decision on their own, and who are worried about exposing their children to the unforeseen side effects of a new vaccine. Physicians and consumer advocates have also questioned the need to immunize young girls against a disease that is no longer very prevalent in the U.S. and doesn’t develop until much later in life.

Finally, the article notes that Joseph Bocchini, chairman of the committee on infectious diseases of the American Academy of Pediatrics, has expressed concern that “parents would decide against vaccinating their children because of the controversy when they might have otherwise opted to do so.” I couldn’t agree more.

For the complete Wall Street Journal article, click HERE (subscription required). For more on my legislation to limit federal funding of mandatory HPV vaccination programs, click HERE.

This week, World Net Daily examined Phil’s legislation to prohibit federal funds from being used to implement mandatory state human-papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programs: 

“States should require vaccinations for communicable diseases, like measles and the mumps. But you can’t catch HPV if an infected schoolmate coughs on you or shares your juice box at lunch. Whether or not girls get vaccinated against HPV is a decision for parents and physicians, not state governments,” [Gingrey] said.

He noted that HPV is a “sexually-transmitted disease and not a communicable health concern”‘ so required vaccinations would overstep the government’s role “and overrides the decisions of patients, parents and physicians.”

To read more on Phil’s legislation, click HERE.

In today’s Roll Call Newspaper, Phil opines on the long-term care crisis facing our nation - and what Congress can do to prevent it. Phil explains:

With the baby boomer generation set to retire, the U.S. is verging on a long-term care crisis. Millions who haven’t planned for this expensive stage in life are rapidly approaching it. Since Medicare doesn’t cover most long-term care, these costs can quickly bankrupt seniors whose assets preclude them from Medicaid coverage.

This has left many Americans with two unappetizing choices: to quickly burn through their savings paying for long-term care, or to hide their assets and get the government to pay for their care through Medicaid. The first is unfair to seniors who have worked hard to save for retirement. The second is unfair to taxpayers who don’t want to see skyrocketing Medicaid spending due to abuse in the system.

Phil also cautions that Congress take the right approach to reform:

As Congress looks for solutions, we must take care not to create more problems. Entitlement spending has ballooned over the past decade, rapidly engulfing a growing portion of our federal budget. To make our long-term care system sustainable and affordable, Congress needs to pass market-based reforms and encourage individuals to take responsibility for their long-term care needs.

Click HERE to read Phil’s recomendation for fixing this problem - and assuring seniors can better afford their long-term care needs.

Breaking news from the Department of Health and Human Services:

HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt today announced that more than 1.4 million beneficiaries have enrolled in Medicare’s Part D program since June 2006, bringing the total number of people with Medicare now receiving comprehensive prescription drug coverage to more than 39 million.

For more on how Medicare prescription drug coverage is helping seniors, click HERE. If you or a senior in your life needs more information on the Medicare Part D program, click HERE.