Tim Murphy

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. I would like to talk a little bit, if I may, about some of these issues about errors in hospitals. I opened up by saying we clearly have the best health care available in America, but I would like the Speaker and others to imagine this: when you go into a hospital or doctor's office, generally you will see filing cabinets packed with paper records of a patient's care. Now, imagine also if the patient has seen multiple doctors, there are multiple files, and probably stacked somewhere on top of those filing cabinets are reports waiting to be filed, and chances are pretty good that the records between doctors offices are disconnected, that is, one doctor may not know what the other physicians or treatment specialists have seen. Perhaps the patient has not gone for the lab tests or consultations they have been asked to do. Perhaps they have, and those records have not been returned, x-rays have not come back over, whatever that is. But you have a situation of voluminous paper records, oftentimes scattered within a hospital in different departments or between different offices, and that results in the likelihood that important medical records could be lost or not retrieved at that moment when someone needs to be making decisions. Having worked in both neonatal intensive care units, pediatric units, and my own private practice as a psychologist, it was often critically important to be able to access records and review them quickly. But a simple statement one was looking for in a file that was multiple volumes and oftentimes multiple inches thick, it could take hours to retrieve critically important data. The risk of that is that some information may be missing. The risk is that important information may be missed. One study even found that one in seven medical records was missing vital information, and this could then lead to redundant tests or misdiagnoses, redundant treatments or inappropriate treatments. Health administration paperwork costs almost $300 billion annually, equal to about $1,000 per person in America, or actually 31 percent of all health care expenditures in the United States; and yet we have hospitals with 21st-century technology that can use a 64-cut CT scanner that can give us three dimensional films of patients' hearts, but we are still using an 18th-century paper system to keep track of these things. The RAND Corporation reported that these critical errors that come from redundant, unnecessary, and missed information adds $162 billion in health care costs per year, a huge avoidable expense. Part of our move as the Republican conference here is to make sure that we encourage and fund through incentives hospitals and doctors' offices to move towards health information technology. Medication errors alone cost Medicare about $29 billion in costs. Whenever we talk about cost savings in programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, it is not slashing care, it is improving care; it is not denying access to care, it is bringing access to care. And that is vitally important. Anyone who has ever had a prescription that could not be read or the pharmacist had to call back or the patient wasn't sure if it was duplicating another medication recognizes how these errors cost the system. The best, the best doctors and the best hospitals and the best specialists have their eyes blindfolded when it comes to trying to deal with these. In the Deficit Reduction Act, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, $150 million was put in there for hospitals to use grants in high Medicaid populations, but throughout the Nation we see many health information technology companies emerging at hospitals and insurance companies investing billions of dollars, a critically important issue. So next time when one goes to the doctor's office and sees the papers gone, but to see, for example, in VA hospitals now the doctor putting records on a computer, calling up x-rays on a computer, looking at CT scans and MRIs, and, yes, even watching films of surgery on their computer screen, recognize that this is part of where we need to go with 21st-century medical technology. But also know this: the physician who did the test or radiologist who did the x-ray can immediately send it over secure and confidentially to one's physician, who can then review the record. In fact, I have been in physicians' offices, since, unfortunately, a few months ago I had an accident in Iraq and then had a CT scan in Baghdad and an MRI done in Germany, and found that what could happen here is the records could then be spent over on computer disk to physicians in Washington, D.C. and Bethesda who could then review those and easily consult, without having to call for new tests and repeat those. It wasn't just the wording that they had of what was taking place in the medical test. They could actually see it themselves. Repeat this story millions of times a day across America, and you can see why the RAND Corporation says we could have savings of $160 billion; and in addition to that, when you look at the savings that comes from otherwise lost days in the workplace, another $150 billion in savings. Let me mention one other area that we can track with electronic medical records, and that is infection rates. A bill that I am working on to actually give incentives to hospitals and medical practices to reduce infections is critically important. Health care-acquired infections cost the United States about $50 billion in annual medical costs. Now, these infections are such things as staphylococcus, methacycline-resistant staphylococcus aureous, urinary tract infections, pneumonia, et cetera, where what happens is through such low-tech issues as hand-washing or cleaning equipment, because we take these things for granted so much, they are not done. Sadly, this leads to somewhere up above 75,000, some estimates even as high as 90,000, deaths per year, so says the Center For Disease Control, and these, in many cases are preventible. Now, in some cases they are not, if someone comes in with an open wound or someone is taking immunosuppressant drugs. But what we need to do here is actually help patients get better care. We can save massive amounts if we use Medicare and Medicaid to provide incentives and pay for performance for hospitals that reduce these. But this is where, again, using electronic medical records helps, by having this information available that hospitals can review and pull up information and saying what is happening? Are we seeing trends within the hospital? Should we take action? Information that can come up as an immediate alert to the hospital medical staff, to medical directors and hospital personnel, hospital administrators, to say infections are now detected within the hospital, we need to take affirmative, aggressive, and thorough action to isolate and deal with this. That being the case, we can save tens of thousands of lives a year and tens of billions of dollars. Now, we point these out because it is so critically important. I hear time and time again people misleading the American public that somehow we are trying to cut Medicare and Medicaid. That is not true. What we are trying to do is improve the system. And any American family knows that whether it is your car or your house, that when you deal with using inefficient and cheap ineffective ways, you can end up paying much more because the tools you use may break or the system you are trying to use to fix the problem may actually be ineffective, and it is going to cost you more in the long run. Doing poor health care, making wrong decisions in health care, is what is expensive. Making the right decisions in health care and making sure we have the highest quality is what lowers costs. And once and for all, we have to put these tools back into the hands of health care providers across the Nation, give them the information that is needed on every patient, every time, making sure those records are secure and so that physicians are competent and hospital personnel are competent. Dr. David Brailer, the President's appointee to take many of these actions in the area of health information technology, and Secretary Leavitt, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, are leading the charge in some of these advances along with us in Congress. This is something that we want the American people to know, Mr. Speaker; that in so doing, we will actually be saving tens of thousands of lives and tens of billions of dollars. These are efforts we will not yield on, because we recognize that the number of deaths that occur per year from us having our eyes blindfolded and our hands and not being able to do the best in health care is actually more that occur in a single year than died in all of the Vietnam War. We have the tools to do this, and we as a Republican Conference will continue to lead this Nation in moving forward to save lives and save money. With that, I yield back to the gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey, to control the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, the rapidly rising cost of health care has put quality coverage out of the reach of millions of families. Too many cannot afford to see their doctor. Too many put off early treatment. Too many are overwhelmed by hospital bills. Too many meet a wall of bureaucracy that stands between them and their doctor. This system costs too many lives and too many dollars. Each side of the aisle has offered solutions: national health care on one side of the aisle, health savings accounts on the other. But these two plans deal with payments. Neither solves the problem of costly errors and inefficiency. Cost shifting is not cost savings. They only focus on who is paying, when we need to reform what we are paying for. Electronic medical records, electronic prescribing, eliminating hospital-borne infections, accurate dates on prescription drugs, expanding patients' care management, ending defensive medicine and allowing doctors to volunteer at community health centers are among the reforms our Nation needs. Any of us would reach out to save the life of one person. We must reform the health care system to save ten of thousands of lives and tens of billions of dollars. Members can see more information on this at www.murphy.house.gov.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I am pleased to join my colleagues in support of this resolution to recognize the students, teachers, faculty, and graduates of Catholic schools. At Catholic schools across my State of Pennsylvania and the Nation, students will receive the highest-quality teaching in all academic subjects. But perhaps more important, beyond reading, writing, and arithmetic, students will be exposed to well- rounded, values-based curricula that teach the mind, the heart, the body, and the soul. Indeed, Catholic schools don't shy a away from matters of right and wrong. The late Pope John Paul II, himself a great advocate for education, challenged Catholic schools to ``foster in your students a social consciousness which will move them to meet the needs of their neighbors and to discern and to seek to remove the sources of injustice in society.'' I believe Catholic schools do promote social awareness and help make the world a better place to live. Last week, as we know, was Catholic Schools Week, and the theme was ``Catholic Schools: Character, Compassion, and Values.'' As a young student at St. Barnabas Elementary School myself and Walsh Jesuit High School, I was taught these traits at early ages. I greatly value my Catholic school education, as I do my public school education. The 18th Congressional District of Pennsylvania has this diversity of many Catholic schools, 67 in Allegheny County alone, five in Washington County, 19 in Westmoreland County. With over 183,000 students educated in Catholic schools across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the impact is huge. Eighty percent of Catholic school students go on to college, and Catholic schools saved more than $1 billion last year in taxpayer funds in Pennsylvania alone by a reduction of the dropout rate to less than 3 percent. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this legislation. I commend the authors and all those who teach and are students of Catholic schools.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, allowing me to wrap up here. As we congratulate this new generation of Steelers who we are excited about, it is a good time to also remember those who got us so many memories in the past: Terry Bradshaw; Lynn Swann; Joe Greene; Franco Harris; Blount; Lambert; Wagner; and, of course, the great coach Chuck Noll. They built a team, along with the Rooneys, in which the dynasty was set. And it is an exciting time for Pittsburgh to celebrate, Pittsburghers and everywhere around the world in the Steelers Nation to celebrate the new generation of Steelers. As a Congress we take our hats off to all of the NFL players who work so hard and maintain that tenacity and dignity on and off the field and show what America is about. As I talked to soldiers overseas and saw Steelers banners hanging there as well as many other NFL banners, it was always fascinating for me to see how people from overseas still clung to the hopes that their hometown teams gave them. Indeed, it is a message that goes to people all throughout the world for the Steelers Nation of what it means to be a team that was counted down and out but ended up on top. It is something of a lesson we can all remember as Americans of what this great team, the Super Steelers, have taught us.

Mr. MURPHY. The super Steelers, Mr. Speaker, are super again. And as Myron Cope would say, yoi and double yoi. For Sunday night, the Steelers won Super Bowl XL, otherwise in town we call it Super Bowl extra large, over the Seattle Seahawks by a score of 21-10. This monumental win was the fifth National Football League championship for the Steelers franchise, tied now for the most in pro football history. And as we say in the `Burgh, this win signified one for the thumb as it provided Pittsburgh with a fifth championship ring for their last finger on the city's collective hand. The amazing Steelers finished their season by winning their final eight games, including the Super Bowl. And when the Steelers had a 7-5 record during the regular season, it looked like they might miss the playoffs completely unless they won each of their final four regular season games. But this team, like this city, does not give up. And the fans of the Steeler nation never give up on them. So the Steelers won their final four games. Then after clinching the sixth and final AFC playoff seed, the Steelers became the first team to win three road playoff games and then the Super Bowl. And they were confronted with the toughest possible road to get there. The Steelers had to beat the top three teams in the AFC, the Cincinnati Bengals, the Indianapolis Colts and the Denver Broncos, each on their respective home fields. No other team ever did this. No sixth-seeded playoff team ever made it to the Super Bowl. But then again, no other team is the Pittsburgh Steelers. In the Super Bowl the Steelers faced the mighty Seattle Seahawks who possessed the highest scoring offense in the league, the NFL Most Valuable Player, running back Shaun Alexander. The Steelers' dominant defense, however, led by Troy Polamalu and Joey Porter limited the prolific Seahawks to just 10 points. The Steelers offense was led by Super Bowl MVP Hines Ward who is here on the cover of the Tribune Review. Mr. Speaker, you might be interested to know, as you probably already do, that Hines Ward is a graduate from the University of Georgia. He caught five passes for 123 yards and one touchdown which was thrown by wide receiver Antwaan Randle-El on a classic reverse pass. Running back Willie Parker scored a Super Bowl record 75-yard run. Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger started the scoring with the second- quarter touchdown, was also known as having that play called the ``tackle against the Colts,'' which kept the Steelers' dream alive. This was a remarkable fifth Super Bowl victory for a team that personifies grit, tenacity, and excellence with the city of Pittsburgh and members of the Steeler nation from around the world. It was a particularly great accomplishment for a team that was originally purchased by founder Art Rooney in 1933 for $2,500. At that time the Steelers were one of 10 charter members of the National Football League. Today, the Steelers are operated by team owner Dan Rooney, his son and team president Art Rooney II, all from the offspring of Art Rooney. Congratulations also go to head coach Bill Cowher who finally made it to the top of the mountain, as Dan Rooney says, for this win of the Vince Lombardi Trophy to bring it back to his hometown of Pittsburgh. I know every coach from defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau, offensive coordinator Ken Whisenhunt, to the training staff and every front office staff member is reveling in this win, as they should. Congratulations to running back and fan favorite Jerome Bettis. The Bus, the fifth leading rusher in NFL history, went out on top in story- book fashion, winning his first Super Bowl in his hometown of Detroit in the final game of his 13-year career. The Steelers kept their promise to him and brought him back to his hometown. And finally, congratulations to the millions of Steelers fans from throughout the world that make up the Steeler nation. They were there, we were there at every home game and every away game, every household waving our terrible towels here. When I was over in Iraq and I was over in Afghanistan, there they were with their Myron Cope official terrible towels as well. They were there 250,000 strong at a parade Monday in Pittsburgh to welcome the team back. The fans were there over the years, thick and thin, like the Steelers, believing in the best, always strong, never satisfied with just being there. And now, as Dan Rooney has said, now that we have one for the thumb and the ring let us start on the next hand. Congratulations to the super Steelers, and let us make it another one for the next hand next year.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to solemnly support House Concurrent Resolution 331 that mourns the loss of so many coal miners from the Sago and Alma mine disasters and, quite frankly, it is a time for us to remember so many other coal mining disasters. The victims as well as the rescue crews who fought bravely to get them to safety ought to be recognized in the aftermath of this tragedy. But now our deepest sympathies are with the families and friends whose lives have passed. I feel a special affinity to these miners, my own great-grandfather having been a coal miner in Pennsylvania, and while I was a student at Wheeling Jesuit University in Wheeling, I spent so much time working in towns and volunteer work in mining towns in West Virginia, among them being Mann, West Virginia where the great Buffalo Creek flood disaster hit when a dam from a coal mine collapsed and wiped out so many people in that town. It is a rough life for coal miners and coal mining towns, for the families, the wives and loved ones who sit and wait each time the elevator goes down into the shaft. The struggles and the hard scrabble life is so often immortalized in songs and folk songs over the years. And they are true, indeed, for the life is difficult for men and women who work in the mines and recognize the dangers and the constant safety that the mine operators must attend to. It is also time to recognize that there are teams of people out there who did so much and responded so quickly, in particular Consol Energy, which had all five of their West Virginia teams and three Pennsylvania teams first on the site to try and help. We wished and we prayed so much that this would not have ended as it did. Instead, we had hoped that perhaps it would have been what happened at Cue Creek mine disaster of a couple of years ago in Pennsylvania when we all waited and watched with our eyes glued to our televisions as nine miners emerged from the mine late at night. We wished for that. We prayed for that. Sadly that did not happen. And sadly, there may be other disasters of this type, but we must work hard to set the goal that it never happens again. We know that coal is a vital part of American energy. We know that coal and all the things that come out of manufacturing related to coal are a vital part of our country's economy. And the men and women who continue to work in the mines down below or on the surface are all part of that dedication and their willingness through their courage to give so much every day. And then finally, perhaps, what we have to make sure we do, as the gentlewoman from West Virginia was saying, is work very hard with rescue teams and strong safety regulations for mines and enforcement of those regulations to prevent these tragedies from happening again. It is only through such actions that we would fittingly remember those who have come before us and died, and those who may come in the future and be suffering as well. That is the very least we owe their families. And as we honor those who have lost, we need to work towards that safety for those miners and their families for the future.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the U.S. House of Representatives, I rise to honor the priceless life and courageous public service career of State Police Corporal Joseph R. Pokorny. Fearless, responsible, tough, professional, elite, hero. These are some of the apt words that Joseph's friends and colleagues have used to describe him in recent days. Thousands have mourned the loss of Corporal Pokorny, who was senselessly killed in the line of duty during the early morning of December 12, 2005. Born in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, Joseph and his family moved to Center as a young boy. He graduated from Center Area High School in 1978 and attended Indiana University. Joseph later graduated from the Pennsylvania State Police Academy in Hershey in 1983, before embarking on a distinguished law enforcement career of 22 years. In 2000, he was promoted to the rank of corporal--a monumental accomplishment on the elite Pennsylvania State Police force. Joseph always served with uncommon courage, a firm commitment to protecting the public, and a fervent passion for the American way of life. Of all the recent tributes to Corporal Pokorny, perhaps the greatest compliment paid to him was that a close friend who grew up with Joseph said, ``he was a real Pittsburgh guy.'' During this holiday season, my thoughts and prayers have especially been with Corporal Pokorny's parents, Joseph Sr. and Florence, and his teenage son and daughter, Joseph, and Alexandra. They were the most important people in Joseph's life. The world is a safer, better place because of Joseph Pokorny. My fellow citizens of southwestern Pennsylvania and I owe Corporal Pokorny a debt of gratitude that can never be repaid. He will be deeply missed.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, Americans purchase 68 percent more prescription drugs today than they did just 10 years ago, and at the same time, retail prescription prices have risen three times the rate of inflation. How can people afford the medication they need? Some propose price controls, others want the government to pay, but let us also give the power to the patient. Whether we are buying groceries or clothes or cars or even airline tickets, when consumers can compare prices they can drive those prices down. Why not do the same for prescription drugs? Today, many State governments are setting up Web sites for consumers to compare drug prices in their area. These Internet sites help patients to shop smarter and get more affordable choices. One study found that Web sites offering drug comparisons can save patients as much as 40 percent. Congress should support public-private partnerships for sharing online information to help lower these costs for consumers. I urge my colleagues to learn more about how informed consumers can lower their costs on prescription drugs by visiting my Web site at murphy.house.gov.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. I thank my distinguished colleague for yielding. Mr. Speaker, some people want to scare others that this budget cuts services for needy Americans. Medicaid is one of those areas where facts are distorted. This bill increases Medicaid spending by $9.7 billion the first year alone. It continues to increase Medicaid benefits for people who need them. Savings come from reducing Medicaid fraud like New York where there is $18 billion in fraud. It prevents wealthy families with more than $750,000 in home equity from earning Medicaid benefits they don't need. We incorporated many of the changes that the National Governors Association has asked for with unprecedented flexibility. We have to keep the Medicaid system from driving itself into fiscal oblivion. There is nothing compassionate about playing politics with people's hearts. We want to be sure that the Medicaid system is here for people today and tomorrow. That is why we need to give the Governors the flexibility they ask for in this bill.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Madam Speaker, let me start off by saying that as a psychologist who primarily specializes in issues dealing with children and families, when I heard the conclusions on this case, what leapt out at me was how this decision by the Ninth Circuit Court really went far beyond the actual issues in this case, and I had great concerns. Let me walk us through a couple of points here. In 2002, when the first claim was filed in Fields v. Palmdale School District, it came from a parental consent letter that was sent to parents from the Palmdale School District asking parents to sign this informed consent letter. The informed consent letter did talk about there would be three, 20-minute self-report measures given to the children one day. They said it was confidential and did say that the questions may make my child feel uncomfortable, and if this occurs, the researcher in this case would help the parents locate a therapist for some psychological help if necessary. What the parents were not told was that it would contain several questions having to do with sexuality, which were given to first, third and fifth graders. Questions such as touching my private parts too much, thinking about having sex, thinking about touching other people's private parts, thinking about sex when I do not want to, washing myself because I feel dirty inside, and the list goes on. The School District subsequently has claimed that they did not know those questions were going to be given to the children. In fact, they state that they saw a different questionnaire and something was swapped on them. Here is what comes out of this case; that indeed, what may have occurred is this was not an informed consent letter given to parents, and even for parents who did not sign, for whatever reason, this lack of informed consent letter, their children were still administered this questionnaire. This is not how psychological research is to be conducted, Madam Speaker. The standard of ethics for psychologists and for research is a letter of informed consent given to parents must clearly inform parents what is happening. The School District involved should have been clearly told what was happening in this case, too. And then what occurred here is neither. But what is amazing here where this case in the courts could have reaffirmed parents' rights to informed consent before their children were used in psychological research; instead, the Ninth Circuit Court pulled out an overreaching conclusion out of the stratosphere that declared parenting is unconstitutional. They declared parents have no right to protect their children's privacy when they said, ``we hold that there is no freestanding fundamental right of parents to control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex in accordance with their personal and religious values and beliefs.'' They go on to say that we do not quarrel with parents' rights to inform and advise their children about the subject of sex as they see fit. But that is not what this case was about. It was a lack of informed consent. And parents were protesting this. And from the standpoint of psychologists, the question is whether or not issues like that were really appropriate to give to first, third and fifth graders. Certainly, when I have done psychological evaluations for children that we have concerns that they have been sexually abused, the psychologist involved is very careful; the law enforcement people are very careful what questions they ask the child because they are concerned whether the questions themselves cause problems for the children. And when that happens, one has to back off and not ask those questions anymore. In a case like this, first, third and fifth graders overall were asked those questions when there was not even suspicion of some problems. But when the Court continues to say there is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters for their children, either independent of their right to direct the upbringing and education of the children who are encompassed by it, I wonder where these conclusions come from. And I believe it is fully within the jurisdiction of Congress to raise questions and follow the procedures and ask the courts to review this again. Certainly, as the distinguished gentleman from California was saying, I do not know why or if the parents asked for firing of the superintendent. I do not know what complaints they may have lodged with Sacramento or with school boards in these cases, and I cannot speak to those issues. What we are speaking to here is a case in which a court, I believe, far overreached the issues involved with the case and declared parenting unconstitutional. I believe, and I hope Members will support this bill, because we are saying parents indeed do have a right to fully disclose informed consent when their children are asked to do anything. Certainly, parents may not be involved with every step of everything that is said at every level on every day on every moment of every part of a curriculum in school, and I do not think that is what the parents are asking in this case. But they are saying, when a psychological survey or questionnaire is administered to their children, they darn well ought to have the right to know what is in there, especially when the survey itself says it may cause trauma to children. So I am asking my colleagues to support this resolution and ask the Ninth Circuit Court to review this case again.

Mr. MURPHY. Madam Speaker, the gentleman from California made a good point, that there are some dangers involved here. He said that they could have passed a State law in California. Indeed, they could have and should have. The school board could have also acted upon this, as I assume they may well have done so. And, indeed, much of this we would like to uphold is up to the States to take care of matters of education. I agree with him on those points. Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit Court did not agree. The Ninth Circuit Court instead decided to overstep, I believe, what are the boundaries of what a Federal court should be doing, and step in. I believe it is incongruous that government enforces children's attendance in public school, but then the Federal courts say that parents have no right to complain about what children are exposed to while there. Let me refer back to the conclusion made by the judge in this case. He said, ``We hold that parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determination of the public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students.'' Where did that come from? We are talking about children being asked questions of a sexual nature that, as a superintendent of the school has said, the school was not shown this questionnaire, it was not disclosed to the parents. Indeed, if the judge of the Ninth Circuit Court did what the gentleman from California said he ought to do, to simply say, this is not a Federal matter, this should go back to the States, they should deal with this in Sacramento, in the Palmdale School District, and they should make sure that they reaffirm the rights of parents to fully disclose information when they are signing consent forms. This resolution also is not meant to be critical of legitimate psychological pursuits and research. Psychologists have a code of ethics they are to adhere to when they are undergoing research. Indeed, everyone in the mental health and medical fields have to have their research go in front of a human subjects committee to have their concept letters approved. This is not an attempt to bash the mental health community. In fact, what I am trying to do is uphold the standards of the mental health community, which I believe have been usurped in this case. These were not children referred for legitimate psychological testing because there was suspicion of behavioral problems. These were everyday kids given a questionnaire, and everyday parents who were not told what was in that questionnaire. Indeed, what I say, as this resolution passed by the House declares, the fundamental right of parents to direct the education of their children is firmly grounded in the Nation's Constitution and traditions. The Ninth Circuit Court undermines such a right, and the court should rehear the case and reverse the decision. I believe the Court's decision overreached the issues in the case; they overreached their conclusions, and it needs to be overturned. When it comes to what schools are asking very young children about sex or about any matters of privacy, protecting the 14th amendment, the Ninth Circuit Court decided not only do parents not have the right to say no, they do not even have a right to know what is being asked. On behalf of every parent in America, Congress calls upon the courts to correct this deplorable injustice. That is why, in this resolution, we are asking the courts to uphold the rights of parents, to uphold the rights of privacy, what the parents have about their children and certainly to overturn the decision that says parenting is unconstitutional. I ask my colleagues to support this resolution, and I ask parents to also consider the conclusion that, if it stands, what impact this Ninth Circuit Court decision could have with regard to parents' rights to ever speak up again and challenge anything else within the school district.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Actually, I think we are out of time, so I yield back the floor here and thank the gentleman for leading this.

Mr. MURPHY. I thank the gentleman for explaining that. It is such a critically important thing here. And this is where, when you look at the cost, a couple of elements that I consider very important, as a health care practitioner myself, that one of the things we recognize is for the most part, when a physician prescribes medication, I am sure the gentleman has seen this too in his practice, prescribe medications, sometimes patients will not fill that prescription. Sometimes, even if they fill it, they may not take it all. They may take it in part and discontinue it, or they may find if they feel they cannot afford it, they stretch it out. Under such circumstances, when a patient does not take a medication that the physician feels is needed, it can actually worsen their health and cost more. One of the things about this Medicare plan, when the critics were out there saying this is going to cost more, we have to remember the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, does not score savings. And between the entry physical, between the case management, where there will be pharmacists and others who will work with the physician to make sure they are not getting duplicate drugs, there is not confusion, just checking the dosage and following through, plus the idea that the drugs are more affordable, lifesaving, life enhancing, the kind of things that are so important for people's health are more affordable, that means people will take them. And part of this effect is people will be staying out of the hospitals and staying out of emergency rooms with that as well.

Mr. MURPHY. But the rest is covered. That is part of the confusion that takes place. We need to make sure that our colleagues and America understands this is a matter of looking at the overall cost of medications for your year, and that is why it is important the person writes down all those numbers, and have those annual costs ready, or even your monthly costs, so you can compare. But it is, I think, the most valuable way that seniors can look at the overall cost of the Medicare plan.

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I was in the grocery store the other day, and I wanted to buy a loaf of bread. I had not been in this store before. This store must have had 30 or 40 different types of bread. Every roll, shape, flat, cut, everything. I said I just want some whole wheat bread. They helped me find it. I thought this sort of reminds me with some of the choices with the Medicare plan. If anything, yes, there are many choices, but it is important to keep in mind that by working with somebody on the Web site or on the phone, and many pharmacies and senior centers offer this. Ultimately the issue is this: that a person should not just compare the cost of a drug, what is this drug going to cost, but what is it going to cost me over a year's period of time. We looked, for this hypothetical person Jane, what does it cost for a year because in some cases people may say if there is coverage up to $2,250, and if my drugs cost $3,000, they may ask, do I have to pay $3,000? And the answer to that is?

Mr. MURPHY. And the reason a person wants to compare different plans is to make sure that not only their drug is covered, but different plans may have different costs for those individual drugs. So the person can actually shop around on the Internet or on the phone.

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, when you are comparing plans, my understanding is if you look at the most commonly prescribed drugs for seniors, and not every drug may be covered by every plan, there is 97 to 95 percent overlap.

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding to me. I thought it would be helpful to point out a couple of things. When an individual contacts 1-800 Medicare or Medicare.gov, when they have their name, address, medications and dosage level, and what they are paying for it and their ZIP Code, they can find out a number of things. They will be able to compare the cost of medications. Because with the 75 percent discount, 75 percent paid by their tax dollars and other folks' taxes for the first couple thousand, and then after $5,000, 95 percent is paid for by the government, but from this it is important to be able to compare medications. I have a chart here. This is Pennsylvania, my home State. I want to point out something, and that is savings for seniors with multiple chronic conditions for someone in Pennsylvania, this is comparing the savings in the best plan and savings in an average plan. Let me read. Jane is a hypothetical medical beneficiary taking the following medications: Celebrex, 200 milligrams; Fosamas, 70 milligrams; Nexium, 40 milligrams; Singulair, 10 milligrams; Zoloft, 50 milligrams; and metroprolol tartrate, 50 milligrams. What comes out of this is in the best plan it appears there is about a 60 percent savings, or $3,797. In the average plan, about a 32 percent savings, being $2,036 of what they will pay. I am not sure what sort of medical condition this is, and perhaps you can diagnose based upon the medications alone, but I am just interested in your comments on this because it becomes a matter, it is one of the reasons when somebody calls and says how much is my discount going to be, it gets complex. In each case, you have to look at the individual's prescriptions. I wonder if my physician friends here can tell just what this tells them and why it is a matter that deals with the discussions of Medicare.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I want to convey my appreciation to my distinguished colleague from Minnesota, Congressman John Kline, for his deep concern about our Nation's youth. I thank him for offering this legislation, and I also thank the distinguished Chairman of the Education Committee for his work. Let me be clear that I support H.R. 1790. Mr. Speaker, during my career in elected office, I have worked to raise awareness that mental illnesses are real and they must be dealt with. Patients diagnosed with psychological disorders, like depression, have higher rates of chronic medical illness and use health care services more often. Untreated depression costs employers more than $51 billion per year in absenteeism and lost productivity, plus even higher medical and pharmaceutical costs. I have seen first-hand that medication can, indeed, be very successful to depression patients, especially when it is accompanied by proper psychotherapy by a trained and licensed professional. That notwithstanding, I am concerned about some schools coercing parents to medicate their children without medical justification-- exactly what this legislation aims to prevent. When I saw child patients as a psychologist, I was once strongly pressured by a school administrator to recommend medication for students. That sort of pressure is unethical, not to mention potentially leading to harm for children. While I support H.R. 1790, please allow me to raise one concern that we should keep in mind as the bill moves forward. This bill would make Federal education funding to States contingent on their establishing a policy to prohibit school personnel from requiring a child to be medicated in order to attend school. I am concerned that an unintended consequence of this requirement would be that teachers will be less likely to report legitimate mental health illnesses and needs out of a fear of losing Federal funds. The current language that would call for a GAO study does not address this problem. I believe, instead that the study should focus on schools that actively influence parents to have their children receive controlled substances. I have shared language that provides this focus with the author of the bill, and I know we can work together with our colleagues to adjust the direction of the GAO study. Ultimately, we should be doing all we can to encourage parents, teachers and health personnel to communicate with each other whenever there are concerns about children. Our job is to support that communication in every way possible. Nothing in this bill should be construed to limit that important relationship.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. The United States must prepare for an avian flu pandemic which could potentially kill tens of thousands of people and cost tens of billions of dollars. Similar to the 1918 influenza epidemic, the avian flu is a primary cause of death where victims suffer a severe response of respiratory distress as their immune system is compromised. Citizens should make sure they still get their annual flu shot and practice good hygiene, even though the likelihood of scenarios of flu pandemic will not occur. But Congress needs to make sure we improve vaccine distribution mechanisms, improve lines of communications and take steps to mitigate panic to make sure that there is essential communication with local media outlets. We also must increase vaccine production and create incentives for pharmaceutical manufacturers to lower costs and promote cooperation. All this means Congress must move forward to follow the President's national strategy for the pandemic influenza. For further information, I encourage my colleagues to visit my Web site at murphy.house.gov.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. The inscription on the front of the James Farley Post Office in New York City states the unofficial motto of the United States Postal Service: ``neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.'' Clayton J. Smith, otherwise known as ``C.J.'' to his friends and family, was one of these dependable couriers for the Postal Service. For 9 years, Clayton was a diligent letter carrier who worked out of the Post Office at Crafton, Pennsylvania. That was until June 23, 2003, when he was completing his route near the Crafton-Ingram Shopping Center. He never finished his route that day. He was shockingly killed in a tragic accident. He was only 45 years old. Among the family members by whom he was survived include his mother Jean Smith and his two sons. We wish his entire family the very best in the future and can only empathize how difficult the rebuilding of their lives has been over the last 2\1/2\ years. It is with great somberness that I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I sincerely hope naming the Post Office at 770 Trumbull Drive in Greentree in Clayton Smith's honor will be a meaningful tribute to his life, his family, his friends, and his colleagues in the Pittsburgh area. In so doing, we not only honor his memory but the service of all letter carriers and dedicated employers of the Postal Service. I appreciate my Pennsylvania colleagues for joining me as cosponsors of this legislation to facilitate its advancement and thank the distinguished chairman Tom Davis of the Government Reform Committee for bringing this bill to the floor today.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the learned gentleman on these issues, so important to understanding infectious disease. I know one of the aspects of this, too, and I will ask my friend and colleague, Dr. Gingrey of Georgia, to comment on this, and that is helping us in Congress put this in perspective. Back in 1976, an 18-year-old Private David Lewis came into his base at Fort Dix, staggering in, was given some resuscitation, and soon afterwards they determined that he had something called swine flu. Soon after that there was a declaration that this would be a deadly virus, perhaps reaching the level of the Spanish flu of 1918. Even at that time, President Ford went on television saying, ``I have just concluded a meeting on a subject of vast importance to all Americans. I have been advised there is a very real possibility that unless we take effective counteractions, there could be an epidemic of this dangerous disease next fall and winter here in the United States.'' At that time President Ford asked Congress to appropriate $135 million to fight it; and of course, huge problems did not develop with swine flu. I always have the concern that when we are engaged with a public health activity, we have two possible dangers. One is that the disease really does have an outbreak and there is great deal of harm; and two is that if it does not occur, it will leave the public feeling much like the boy who cried ``wolf,'' and then saying there is no concern, we do not really need to do anything. And from your perspective, Dr. Gingrey, I wonder if you could comment on how the public best needs to put this in the perspective of what we need to be thinking of here, and comment on how Congress can best handle that. And I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. MURPHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his time tonight and also the indulgence of our colleagues in listening to this. We will continue to push these health care issues so vitally important for the health of our constituents and of all Americans. On my own Web site at murphy.house.gov I have further information on health care, FYIs, as I call them and sent to my colleagues every week. I hope people will look at that, and I hope my colleagues will continue to work with us, but really all Members of Congress, not only those with a health care background, but together, we will see some major changes in not only saving lives, but saving money.

Mr. MURPHY. Madam Speaker, tonight, a number of the members of the Republican Conference are going to speak on an issue we know all Americans are concerned about and Members of the Congress are deeply concerned about and that has to do with health care. I would like at this point perhaps to step off from the comments just made by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my co-committee man, who just spoke about influenza, the avian influenza, and use that as a stepping off point to talk about some areas that we need to be working on in Congress and some areas we are working on when it comes to dealing with concerns about infections and infectious diseases. The reason I want to start from this point is to show what we need to do and what we are doing in Congress to deal with a number of potentially large issues. Everyone will remember just a couple of short years ago we had the concerns about the SARS virus, which quickly spread throughout parts of the world. Luckily, it did not stay around very long; but because people who had the disease treated other folks who then traveled throughout this country and others, we saw that disease spread quickly. We also remember just a few years ago the Ebola virus and the worries about that. We worry also about mad cow disease, and of course, we are concerned about bioterrorism. In all of these instances, how Health and Human Services, how county and State health departments, how hospitals, physicians, nearly all health care providers, handle such instances around the world makes a huge difference in containing the diseases and also with regard to saving lives. Recently, President Bush made some comments in calling for $7 billion in congressional appropriations to help deal with a number of aspects of concerns about avian flu. Buying enough inoculations for that, so the people could have some immunizations against the flu; working on other areas of research; preparing health plans, all these are part of it. What we are going to be talking about tonight will be some aspects of how we can be better prepared, what our health care system needs to be doing, and how even such things as changes in Medicaid, we are going to be using the clout of the Federal Government to make some changes. Actually, I would like to, as long as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) is here and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), my good friend, is here, too, I would like to use a few moments to open up a dialogue with them about some issues about the avian flu, if I may, and ask about a couple of aspects here that have to do with how this really works; and as physicians here, I thought I would perhaps start off with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) and ask a question or two, if I may, if the gentleman would not mind standing for a colloquy on this. A lot of Americans are very concerned about what happens with the transmission of this disease, in many cases do not understand, well, how can I have a flu one year, but the Spanish flu, the avian flu have something very different. My understanding of this is that many times people have the flu, those who are at risk for severe problems and death are perhaps the very young, the infirm, those with chronic diseases, the very old, because this flu tends to weaken the system and there could be other bacteriological problems such as pneumonia would take them over. But there is something really virulent or bad, deadly, about avian flu that is the concern; and you were mentioning a little bit about that. Could you talk about how that is so different that we need to understand it is more of a concern, the deadliness of it. I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my friend.

Mr. MURPHY. Well, Madam Speaker, I think it is one of those areas that, again, I think that when one just looks at the numbers of costs up front, and we have some of those frightening numbers, I do not know how many hundreds of billions it may be. And I understand the concern of our colleagues who may have opposed the Medicare bill for Part D because they were concerned about the cost. But I believe this has some innovative aspects in it and some that we have to pay attention to. Oftentimes, people say that one of the definitions of insane behavior is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting the same results, but this patient management aspect and the integration of care between physicians and pharmacists is vitally important. I am hoping that as people review their Medicare Part D options that they also ask questions about that, when they call 1-800-Medicare or go to medicare.gov, or particularly when they call 1-800-Medicare, feel free to ask about that, or ask Members' offices to talk about that. It is something that is so very, very important. It is going to be a different aspect of health care that we follow up on.