I sent an email to Eric Massa some time back, thanking him for voting against HR 3962, and specified that I didn't need a reply, as I'm not one of his constituents. I got a 'form letter' response anyway, and thought I would share it.

Dear [hipparchia]:

Because you have previously been in touch about health issues, I am writing to let you know why I voted "no" on the 2009 major health care reform bill (H.R. 3962). Being accountable to you for my actions, perhaps you will forgive a detailed response.

You may get the chance to be a guinea pig for those "cost-cutting" and "prevention and wellness" payment "innovations" the technocrats are so eager to try out on somebody [else].

Subtitle B—Public Health Insurance Option

[...]

SEC. 324. MODERNIZED PAYMENT INITIATIVES AND DELIVERY SYSTEM REFORM.

The forced-birthers are out in force in the blogosphere, looking for federal funding of abortions in the bill, so I thought I'd help them out.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The public plan and the exchange[s]

The public plan might or might not pay for abortions that don't fall under the Hyde amendment. The Secretary of HHS cannot require private insurance plans offered through the exchange[s] to cover abortions of any kind. Fortunately Sec HHS can't prevent private insurance from paying for abortions either. Abortion cannot be listed as part of the essential benefits package.

If you want to know why people might NOT want to choose the public plan, here's one reason that some women will "choose" to stay with private insurance.

Oh well, at least it doesn't prohibit abortion coverage outright.