New approaches to the health debate

In response to the Nov. 23 letter from Martin R. Ganzglass, "The Wisdom of Gen. Washington," I, too, would like to comment on George Washington's castigation of the critics of the proposed Constitution.

While Washington may have referred to those critics as seeking to "rouse the apprehensions of the ignorant & unthinking . . . [with] objections . . . better calculated to alarm the fears, than to convince the judgment of their readers," we must keep in mind that many of those critics were Washington's fellow Virginians, such as Patrick Henry and George Mason. Considering that the result of such criticism was a 10-amendment modification of that Constitution guaranteeing the rights of individuals against tyranny by government, I'd like to think that the opposition by any senator, regardless of political stripe, to a government-mandated health-care system might run in the same vein.

Joseph T. Bostaph, Herndon

--

As the Senate begins to debate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid's health-care reform bill, Republicans would be wise to offer amendments to ensure that the bill will not be the "budget-buster" that non-governmental budget experts say it is [David S. Broder, op-ed, Nov. 22]. GOP senators should invite the Concord Coalition, the Peter G. Peterson Foundation and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget -- all highly respected, nonpartisan organizations -- to help them draft amendments to make the legislation deficit-neutral.

If the Senate rejected such amendments, the Republicans could then, in good conscience, vote against final passage of the bill on the belief that the legislation would be more costly than the Congressional Budget Office estimates, just as Medicare's costs far exceeded the estimates presented to Congress by the Social Security Administration in 1965.

Richard W. Murphy, Silver Spring