• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

FTCR: Will Chaffee & Reed Betray Rhode Island State Patients' Rights Laws and Allow Insurers Federal Right to Sell Junk Health Policies?

Posted on: Tuesday, 28 March 2006, 12:00 CST

PROVIDENCE, R.I., March 28 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chaffee (R) and Jack Reed (D) will cast critical patient protection votes in the U.S. Senate as early as this week determining whether an over-reaching bill to dismantle state oversight of health insurance and hard-won HMO patients' rights will move forward. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights urged Rhode Island patients to contact Chaffee and call on him to oppose the bill at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/

Sen. Chaffee has taken $39,959 in campaign contributions from the insurance industry since 2001 and Reed has taken $288,208 according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The legislation, S. 1955 (Enzi, R-WY), would gut state Patient Bill of Rights laws established in 41 states and remove local state oversight to replace them with weaker or non-existent "harmonized" federal standards. State rules at risk include Rhode Island laws requiring health insurance plans to provide cervical, prostate and breast cancer screenings and guaranteeing an independent review if an insurer denies coverage. For an analysis of the Rhode Island patient protection laws likely to be overridden by S. 1955 go to: http://64.82.65.67/health/hmolaws.htm

"Senators Chaffee and Reed must choose between the rights of HMO patients to benefits and services required by the Rhode Island legislature and an insurance industry that has given them hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions," said Jerry Flanagan of the non-partisan Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR).

FTCR sent a letter to Sen. Chaffee and Sen. Reed today condemning the attack on patients' rights:

"This attack on states' rights puts millions of patients, many of whom are business owners and self-employed, at risk in a move that amounts to national deregulation of health care," wrote FTCR. "Instead of making health care affordable, these plans are likely to curb early diagnosis of disease by eliminating preventive treatments and exams. Delaying care makes treatment more costly to the policyholder and ultimately to taxpayers... S. 1955 would tempt small business owners and other employers, even those already providing legitimate insurance, to cut health care costs by pushing employees into junk health plans."

Read FTCR's letter at: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/ resources/ChafeeS1955Letter.pdf

Dana Christensen, a widow who was insured with a junk association health plan and owed more than $450,000 when her husband died of bone cancer, spoke out against the bill that would "allow insurance companies to sell junk policies that don't protect patients when they are sick."

Though similar legislation has been proposed in past sessions and passed by the House of Representatives, the bill was approved by the U.S. Senate health committee for the first time this month.

The Christensens' story can be found in an online resource published by FTCR outlining the skeletal benefits of the junk health plans: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/healthcare/AHP

---

The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) is a nonpartisan consumer advocacy organization. For more information, visit us on the web at http://www.ConsumerWatchdog.org

http://www.usnewswire.com

Source: U.S. Newswire

More News in this Category