Bob Beauprez on Health Care
Former Republican Representative (CO-7, 2003-2007)
Healthcare between patients and doctors-not government
The States have relinquished to the federal government control over what ought to be their jurisdiction as sovereign states. I will seek to reestablish the rights and duties of the state, [including] actively opposing the federal takeover of healthcare
(Obamacare). Healthcare should be between patients and doctors-not government. We have the greatest healthcare system in the world. The kinds of reform that are needed are to reduce government control and embrace free market principles.
Source: 2014 gubernatorial campaign website, BobBeauprez.com
, Jan 1, 2014
Democrats build base by providing "equality" to victims
That Democrats almost universally champion expansion of government as the solution for every issue is indisputable. Whether education, healthcare, retirement, environment, or economy, Democrats offer larger, more powerful, more restrictive, more
expensive government as the salve to cure whatever perceived wound needs healing. They have built a base of support from constituencies who largely feel victimized by someone or something, and who feel that to get their "equality" as they think promised
by Thomas Jefferson, government should do something for them and at the expense of someone else. Democrats are quick to oblige, and in so doing have cultivated a following of people who believe they deserve to be
taken care of by government, with many who think they are unable to care for themselves, so government must do it for them
Source: A Return to Values, by Bob Beauprez, p. 5
, Jan 1, 2009
Without freedom of choice, healthcare isn't American
The end user--the patient--has little if any control of the system he is supposed to be the beneficiary of. Patients have little or no ability to choose their providers, insurers, procedures, treatments, and costs of healthcare or to hold those
providers and insurers accountable. And without these basic freedoms of choice, it shouldn't be called American, either.
Government-sponsored universal coverage (aka Hillary-care) can be consolidated down to a nationalized plan of "from each according
to his ability, to each according to his need." Instead of top-down, government-dictated, rationed healthcare FOR consumers, Republicans should champion patient empowerment so the patients will have the freedom to choose the best solution for
The central issue of debate is really about whether to nationalize healthcare in a government-controlled socialized system or to allow patients and doctors to manage individual healthcare in a market-based environment.
Source: A Return to Values, by Bob Beauprez, p.132-3
, Jan 1, 2009
Create a tort environment that supports medical R&D
Republicans should embrace commonsense, market-based solutions that empower patients and liberate doctors to make the best possible decisions for every situation that occurs. To do that, we must support the following by every means available:
Republicans can and should certainly be enthusiastic supporters of continued research and development, but that must include not only funding but also a tort environment that provides a balance between recourse for wronged consumers
and freedom to practice for doctors and nurses. Return on investment from research and development is uncertain by definition, and the overly litigious environment adds greatly to the risk, delays, and direct cost of medical advancements.
Source: A Return to Values, by Bob Beauprez, p.134-5
, Jan 1, 2009
Research and development
- Review of patent-protection laws
- Transport access to information
- Decentralized decision making
- Increased competition and market-based choices
- Patient-centered control
- Expedient and fair resolution for medical
Voted YES on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay.
Vote to pass a resolution, agreeing to S. AMDT. 2691 that removes the following provisions from S 1932:
Reference: Reconciliation resolution on the FY06 budget;
Bill H Res 653 on S. AMDT. 2691
; vote number 2006-004
on Feb 1, 2006
- Allows hospitals to refuse treatment to Medicaid patients when they are unable to pay their co-pay if the hospital deems the situation to be a non-emergency
- Excludes payment to grandparents for foster care
Voted YES on limiting medical malpractice lawsuits to $250,000 damages.
Vote to pass a bill that would limit the awards that plaintiffs and their attorneys could be given in medical malpractice cases. The bill would limit non-economic damages, including physical and emotional pain to $250,000. The bill would also limit punitive damages to $250,000 or double economic damages, whichever amount is greater. Punitive damages would be banned against makers and distributors of medical products if the Food and Drug Administration approved those products. The bill would call for all states to set damage caps but would not block existing state statutory limits. The bill would cap attorneys' contingency fees to 40% of the first $50,000 in damages; 33.3% of the next $50,000; 25% of the next $500,000; and 15% of any amount in excess of $600,000.
Reference: Medical Malpractice Liability Limitation bill;
Bill HR 4280
; vote number 2004-166
on May 12, 2004
Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients.
Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003: Vote to adopt the conference report on the bill that would create a prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. Starting in 2006, prescription coverage would be made available through private insurers to seniors. Seniors would pay a monthly premium of an estimated $35 in 2006. Individuals enrolled in the plan would cover the first $250 of annual drug costs themselves, and 25 percent of all drug costs up to $2,250. The government would offer a fallback prescription drug plan in regions were no private plans had made a bid.Over a 10 year time period medicare payments to managed care plans would increase by $14.2 billion. A pilot project would begin in 2010 in which Medicare would compete with private insurers to provide coverage for doctors and hospitals costs in six metropolitan areas for six years. The importation of drugs from Canada would be approved only if HHS determines there is no safety risks and that consumers would be saving money.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Hastert, R-IL;
; vote number 2003-669
on Nov 22, 2003
Voted NO on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs.
Pharmaceutical Market Access Act of 2003: Vote to pass a bill that would call for the Food and Drug Administration to begin a program that would permit the importation of FDA-approved prescription drugs from Australia, Canada, the European Union, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Lichtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and South Africa.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Gutknecht, R-MN;
; vote number 2003-445
on Jul 24, 2003
Voted YES on small business associations for buying health insurance.
Vote to pass a bill that would permit the creation of association health plans through which small companies could group together to buy insurance for their employees. Association health plans that cover employees in several states would be excused from many individual state insurance regulations but would be regulated by the Labor Department.
Reference: Small Business Health Fairness Act;
Bill HR 660
; vote number 2003-296
on Jun 19, 2003
Voted YES on capping damages & setting time limits in medical lawsuits.
Help Efficient, Accessible, Low Cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2003: To improve patient access to health care services and provide improved medical care by reducing the excessive burden the liability system places on the health care delivery system. Limits the availability of punitive damages, and sets a 3-year limit for suing.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Greenwood, R-PA;
Bill HR 5
; vote number 2003-64
on Mar 13, 2003
Rated 0% by APHA, indicating a anti-public health voting record.
Beauprez scores 0% by APHA on health issues
The American Public Health Association (APHA) is the oldest and largest organization of public health professionals in the world, representing more than 50,000 members from over 50 occupations of public health. APHA is concerned with a broad set of issues affecting personal and environmental health, including federal and state funding for health programs, pollution control, programs and policies related to chronic and infectious diseases, a smoke-free society, and professional education in public health.
The following ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
Source: APHA website 03n-APHA on Dec 31, 2003
Page last updated: Nov 26, 2014