Dear Colin French,

Although I often do not agree with your opinions, I still read your weekly column. However, in the last edition I was deeply frustrated by the blatant factual mistakes and slighted diction. The column covered the passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act, the House of Representative’s version of a health care reform bill, and the Stupak Amendment, which prevents insurance plans that receive government subsidies from funding abortions. In addition, the column discussed only the Democratic Party in relation to the amendment, specifically the Blue Dog Coalition, which is a group of fiscally conservative Democrats in the House of Representatives. After working as a Staff Assistant for a Blue Dog Democrat, I was particularly intrigued by certain facts in your column.

The first part of the column that caught my attention was when in reference to the Stupak amendment you wrote, “This locked up the votes of an additional 64 ‘blue dog’ democrats, barely giving the margin they needed for victory.” The initial problem with this statement is that there are only 52 Blue Dog Democrats, and you imply that the number is greater. Actuality, the number of Blue Dogs that voted in support of the Stupak Amendment was 36 bringing the total number of Democrats to 64. Also, not every Blue Dog that voted for the Stupak Amendment voted to pass the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Notably, the results of the passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act were accurately stated as 220-215.

The next part of the issue that you address is the cost of the Affordable Health Care for America Act. You describe it as “An expensive healthcare bill, one that will add trillions to the deficit and likely put major insurance companies out of business.” I do not dispute that the healthcare bill will be expensive, but the house bill is not set up to cost trillions. On November 6, 2009, the Congressional Budget Office released that the net cost of the House health care bill as $1.052 trillion over the next decade, and this cost is not directly added to the national debt as implied. The house bill also contained a public option, but it is just that, an option. And, I have been unable to find sources that support your claim that the house health care bill is “likely put major insurance companies out of business.”

Your column also makes reference to “House Democratic leader Debbie Shultz (D- Florida),” who prefers to be called Debbie Wasserman Schultz. I would like to clarify that the House Democratic leaders are in fact Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer. While Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz is in her third congressional term and is one of nine Chief Deputy Majority Whips, who help secure the presence of party members for important votes. However, it is misleading to her actual position in Congress to call her “House Democratic leader.”

While you are entitled to your own opinions, no one is entitled to lax fact-checking or misrepresenting information. You are guilty of both in this article. While I read your other pieces this semester, it never crossed my mind that you would have the audacity to represent things as fact that you had not verified.

- Leslie Golden ‘12