Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Education and the Workforce be discharged from further consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 186) recognizing the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Laborers' International Union of North America and congratulating the members and officers of the Laborers' International Union of North America for the Union's many achievements, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to offer, with the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), a resolution honoring the 100th anniversary of the Laborers' International Union of North America and to congratulate their members on the union's many achievements over this century.

On April 13, 1903, laborers from across America rose to the challenge set forth by American Federation of Labor President Samuel Gompers to come to Washington and to meet and form a union to represent their interests. Made up of hardworking immigrants and minorities focused on construction work, these workers formed the Laborers' Union, and for 100 years, this union has helped build America into the strong Nation that it is today.

The union also pioneered equal treatment on the job for all workers, regardless of race, established union-led training and career development centers, and fought hard to improve worker safety.

In 1965, the Laborers' Union officially changed its name to the Laborers' International Union of North America to show a growing diversification from construction into health care, food service, shipbuilding, mail handling, as well as local, State and government service.

While the name of the union has changed, the spirit and dedication of those laborers 100 years ago has neither changed nor diminished, but instead has grown into a mighty work force for a better America. I wish the hard-working men and women a very much deserved happy 100th birthday, and I encourage them to keep up their impressive work well into the future.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Res. 186.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on behalf of the Women's Cancer Recovery Act, a bill I introduced today with my colleague, Representative Sue Myrick. This important piece of legislation would provide a significant measure of relief for women across our Nation who are confronted by breast cancer. We introduce this bill on behalf of women who are now fighting the battle against breast cancer, and for any friends and relatives who may have lost a loved one to this terrible disease.

According to the National Breast Cancer Foundation, this year 182,000 new breast cancer diagnoses are expected in the United States. Fortunately, with increased early detection through mammography and improved surgery options, the past two decades have seen large improvements in the treatment of breast cancer. However, although some of the trauma associated with breast cancer treatment has been reduced, in recent years there has been a sharp rise in the number of outpatient, or ``drive-through,'' mastectomies. Of particular concern to me is that insurance plans, rather than the patient and her physician, have been determining the appropriate length of postoperative hospital stay.

Specifically, our legislation would address these concerns by requiring insurance plans that provide breast cancer medical and surgical benefits to guarantee medically appropriate and adequate inpatient care following a mastectomy, lumpectomy or lymph node dissection. This legislation will help to end the practice of ``drive- through'' mastectomies and will also protect doctors from any penalties or reductions in reimbursement from insurance plans when they follow their judgment on what is medically appropriate and necessary for the patient.

Most importantly, group health insurers will not be able to provide ``bonuses'' or any other financial incentives to a physician in order to keep in-patient stays below certain limits, or limit referrals to second opinions.

Our legislation also requires health care providers to pay for secondary consultations when test results come back either negative or positive. This provision will give all patients the benefit of a second opinion in relation to diagnosing all types of cancer, not just breast cancer.

I am proud to say that the Women's Cancer Recovery Act will empower women to determine the best course of care. Recovery time from a mastectomy will not be decided by an insurance company actuary. Rather, it will be decided by someone with medical expertise, which, in most cases, is the familiar face of the woman's doctor.

I hope that this legislation will at least ease some of the fear associated with mas- tectomies. Breast cancer is devastating enough for a woman and her family to cope with, without the added burden of overcoming obstacles to treatment.

I urge my colleagues to support and adopt the Women's Cancer Recovery Act of 2003.