With the "Opt-Out" provision for states there is NO EXCUSE for any democrat to not support PO -

[JohnWxy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20091027/pl_mcclatchy/3342694">im-Moderate Dems cool to Public Option

here is a list of immoderate dems:

Arkansas' Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor ,
Louisiana's Mary Landrieu ,
Virginia's Jim Webb and Mark Warner ,
Montana's Jon Tester ,
Nebraska's Ben Nelson ,
Indiana's Evan Bayh ,
North Dakota's Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan and
Delaware's Thomas Carper .



for your consideration, a sample email:


THe honourable __________;

Consider this letter a warning. I do not consider the Health Care reform bill (that is, with a Government provided Public Option for those who do not have health insurance) as optional. This is MUST PASS legislation. With the addition of the "Opt-out" provision I cannot imagine what legitimate reason you could have for not supporting this necessary action.

My health insurance premiums have doubled in the last ten years while my deductible and copay amounts have gone up. If the premiums keep going up as they have (there is no reason to assume they won't) my employer will be forced, within the next several years, to drop our group coverage. Realistically, I won't be able to afford individual coverage and my family will be without any insurance. This is NOT a tenable situation.

Beyond my own situation I think it's safe to say we could see 30% or more of the population without health insurance within ten years. Our current health insurance system is about to go off a cliff. But it seems that some legislators are prepared to stop reasonable, intelligent action on the part of those in the Senate who are prepared and sensible enough to do the right thing.

Currently there are millions of people without insurance who go into hospital emergency rooms to get a medical care. This is costing the Government and me the tax-payer millions of dollars ($35 million in 2004) when Medicare and Medicaid covered people go to the hospital - because of higher rates charged by the hospitals and doctors to recover the cost of caring for the uninsured. I understand I also pay about $1,000 to $1,200 more in my insurance premiums because of the cost of uncompensated care. If these people had insurance, they could get the same treatment from a doctor for about one fourth the cost (http://www.fixourhealthcare.ca.gov/index.php/facts/more/6771/).

If we paid for insurance for these people it would be cheaper to have them go to a doctor than paying for them to go to a hospital emergency room for medical care as they currently do. We are paying for the uninsured to get care anyway, through higher taxes and higher premiums, why not pay for it being done in a cheaper way? This is what the Health Care Reform legislation is intended to do. Help those who don't have health insurance and do in a way which is cheaper than the way we are currently doing.

Now while I consider it practicable to help people get insurance, I absolutely reject the idea of subsidizing people's insurance (and thus subsidizing insurance companies) WITHOUT HAVING A PUBLIC OPTION TO KEEP INSURANCE COMPANIES HONEST. I can appreciate that insurance companies would enjoy being compensaed for covering the uninsured - at any rate they prescribe. But it is consummate nonsense to subsidize insurance companies without having the Public Option to keep the cost from getting out of line.

I would like to know what it is about this approach that does not make sense to you. What is even more incomprehensible to me is the logic by which anybody who can opt out of this deal would still be opposed to it for the rest of us. That anybody would interfere with or attempt to stop such necessary, ethical and practical legislation as Health Care Reform WITH a Public Option from being enacted – when it’s not necessary to do so demands that all citizens who believe in responsible government commit to, fund and participate in removing these refactory, contemptible individuals from office.

Anticipating a more reasonable postion regarding the matter of Health Care Reform on your part, I remain your thoughtful monitor.

[JohnWxy]

1. er,,,, correction. In para 4 that's supposed to read ($35 Billion in 2004) ...should print and read

before posting.