I suffer from a debilitating condition, septic arthritis, so naturally I have been following the debate over national health care reform closely. I support a public option, because I believe the current monopoly of the health care system by the profit-making sector is not the best way to keep costs down.

I believe in the cooperative business model, a possible blueprint for the public option, not least because co-ops provide healthy competition and help keep markets open and honest.

I am fortunate to be covered by one of the best insurance plans in the country, Blue Cross Blue Shield, considered by many to be the gold standard of employer-provided group insurance policies. To date, my septic arthritis has cost Blue Cross a quarter of a million dollars and left me with a debt of about $60,000, mostly the cost of months of nursing home stays not covered by my health insurance.

I'm 58, in a wheelchair and learning to walk again. Who knows how long I'll be strong enough for the classroom? But I'll be paying off my credit union loan until I am 78.

As usual, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., is more interested in what is best for Nebraskans than scoring partisan points. He is guided by principles of fiscal responsibility, wise use of resources and common sense.

I hope in the end he comes around to support a public option. I'm confident that his final vote will reflect careful discernment and sincere good faith in the best interest of our state and our country.

I cannot say the same for junior Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb. As usual, he is marching in lock-step with his party. Johanns disappoints me, but that's no surprise.

Sally Herrin, Lincoln

Cut military costs

In all the debate over out-of-control deficits ("U.S. deficit is too deep," editorial, Oct. 28), what usually never gets mentioned is in fact the biggest culprit of all: defense spending.

If President Barack Obama approves Gen. Stanley McChrystal's troop surge in Afghanistan, there would be a 20-to-1 ratio between international forces and Taliban insurgents ("U.S., NATO forces greatly outnumber Taliban now," Oct. 28).

And yet, if the military can't achieve victory with that kind of numerical advantage, isn't it time to rethink the military? It's still fighting wars with a Cold War mentality, with bombs, drones, tanks, etc.

As noted in the editorial, there's no way we could "turn off the spigot" on military spending as we did once World War II came to an end.

But by paring down defense spending considerably and forcing the military to fight smaller and smarter, all the things that have been at the center of debate recently - paying for health care reform, shoring up Social Security and Medicare, building roads and bridges - easily could be paid for.

Eric T. Foster, Lincoln

Will Nelson buckle?

What good is Sen. Ben Nelson's vote on health care if he agrees to vote for cloture? Cloture interferes with fair debate and undermines the ability for varying points of view to be expressed and a fair up or down vote on legislation.

The vote on health care may be the single most important vote of the senator's career, and he would diminish any chance of a bipartisan bill by voting for a simple majority passage.

Our country is facing an overwhelming deficit, and yet Nelson voted for legislation (conveniently outside of the health care bill) attached to Medicare that would add billions of dollars to that deficit. Luckily the Blue Dog Democrats and Republicans killed the legislation.

Now Nelson is saying he might support a bill that contains a public option allowing states to opt out (or in). Whatever happened to the trigger idea?

I'm sure I speak for many constituents who are becoming more and more concerned with Nelson's need to play both sides against the middle.

We'll all be watching to see if the senator buckles under political pressure when voting on the health care initiative.

Melanie Cassidy, Lincoln

$250 to help seniors

AARP disagrees with the Journal Star ("No check for Grandma," editorial, Oct. 26) that Congress should reject a $250 payment to Social Security beneficiaries. We are calling on Congress to provide seniors with $250 in immediate relief to help offset the painful lack of a cost-of-living adjustment in 2010.

The importance of the COLA should not be underestimated. Many Nebraska retirees rely on Social Security for all or most of their income. Without Social Security, nearly half of Nebraska's 296,000 beneficiaries would live at or below poverty. For one in four Nebraskans age 65 and over, Social Security is their only source of income.

The formula for determining the COLA underestimates the rising cost of necessities seniors depend on most: prescription drugs and health care. Seniors enrolled in Medicare Part D plans have seen their premiums increase by 35 percent between 2006 and 2009, including a 17 percent increase between 2008 and 2009 - the largest one-year increase to date. On average, seniors spend six times more than what those with employer coverage spend of their income on out-of-pocket health care costs.

A $250 payment in 2010 will help struggling seniors, especially those whose Social Security checks will shrink because of rising Medicare Part D premiums. In addition, the extra income will pump money directly into the economy, because seniors are more likely to spend it than any other age group.

Robert Courtney, Crete, volunteer statewide coordinator for advocacy, AARP Nebraska

Help with harvest

Public schools need to bring back programs to allow farm kids who are juniors and seniors in high school to be excused to help with harvest on the farms.

If the schools would bring this back, it would help small farmers who only have one or two guys farming and have 2,000 or 3,000 acres and can't afford to hire others to work for them.

David Stander, Weeping Water

Not giving up

On behalf of the physicians and patients of Nebraska, I want to recognize Sen. Ben Nelson for supporting S. 1776, the Medicare Physician Fairness Act of 2009.

We are disappointed that some of Nelson's colleagues did not join him in making true Medicare physician payment reform a reality. This is an issue of extreme importance, and it is critical action be taken so that our elderly and disabled patients are protected and continue to have access to health care.

As an advocate for physicians and the health of all Nebraskans, we will not give up. This is a serious problem that needs a solution if we want to maintain health care access for Nebraska's senior population.

David Filipi, president, Nebraska Medical Association