A costly hospital bill

By JIM HARRISON AND JAMES SMITH

Guest columnists

It is amazing how different sworn testimony can be from political rhetoric. Facts loosely thrown out in political debate often change when people swear to tell the truth on a Bible.

For example, some people associated with Lexington Medical Center for months spoke of “horror stories” in which Lexington citizens died because the hospital did not have an open-heart surgery program. This was a cornerstone for rationalizing the irrational.

When put under oath, however, hospital officials admitted they did not know of one case where this actually happened.

The testimony was given at an Administrative Law Court hearing in which Lexington Medical Center appealed the Department of Health and Environmental Control’s decision that denied the hospital’s application for an open-heart surgery program.

The Administrative Law Court followed its procedures that are outlined in both law and rules. All parties were afforded the opportunity to offer testimony, expert witnesses and present evidence. The hearing before the administrative law court lasted 16 days, the longest in the history of the court. At the conclusion of this hearing, the judge advised the parties that he would render his decision by this summer. To that point everyone had followed the process, obeyed the laws, played by the rules.

That’s about when the horror stories resurfaced, and when Lexington Medical Center decided to do politically that which it had failed to do through legal avenues available. So the hospital, supported by its loyal county delegation, successfully lobbied the Legislature to carve out for Lexington an open-heart surgery program.

The hospital apparently did not have confidence that its legal position would win the day.

The bill now is on Gov. Mark Sanford’s desk. He should veto it.

The governor has made the cost of health care a priority of his administration. The state health planning process is in place to avoid expensive duplication of services that drive up the cost of health care. The Midlands is served by two hospitals, Palmetto Richland and Providence, that offer open-heart surgery programs.

Because scientific advances have lessened the need for open-heart surgery, neither Palmetto nor Providence is close to capacity. Adding a third program in what amounts to a seven-mile circumference simply does not make sense. State health planners made this determination, but the Legislature, which is not experienced in the complexities of state health planning, overrode the decision.

But the issue goes far beyond one hospital. If Lexington succeeds in bypassing the state health-planning process, the process will become a joke. Hospitals would be unconstrained by rational public policy planning, and use politics to get what they want.

Patients would wind up footing the bill for hospital extravagances through higher insurance premiums.

To its credit, the S.C. Hospital Association has fought against Lexington’s attempts to circumvent the state health planning process. Its members understand what is at stake.

So the governor should veto the bill because of concerns about skyrocketing costs of health care. He should also veto it because it is unconstitutional.

Our Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions that bills approved by the General Assembly cannot include changes that affect only one county or one city or one hospital. The bill, H.3184, would streamline the administrative appeal process, which many of us support. But the poison pill amendment specifically carving out Lexington Medical Center would do more harm than the rest of the bill would do good. That’s not right, and it is not legal under our constitution.

Gov. Sanford has, throughout his term, adhered to the principle that special legislation cannot be tolerated. He has vetoed previous legislation that sought to create special treatment for a single entity.

We join today to ask the governor to stick to his principles. Uphold the law, defend the constitution. Let the legal process under the Administrative Law Court and the Certificate of Need process play to its fair conclusion. Let’s make Lexington Medical play by the same rules we all must obey. Governor, say “no” to H.3184 and exercise your veto to strike it down.

We will do everything possible to make sure it is sustained.

Reps. Smith and Harrison represent Richland County in the S.C. House.