The very day The Times concluded in its editorial that the organization that I chair was leading a taxpayer rebellion against so-called "catastrophic care" legislation, the Wall Street Journal reported that many congressmen have been impressed with the fact that the thousands of letters they are receiving on this issue are not part of an organized campaign but a spontaneous and almost unanimous expression of dissatisfaction.
Yes, my organization opposed this legislation, and we predicted that there would be a grass-roots rebellion against it. Yes, we are talking with other membership organizations about a change in the financing mechanism and no, we don't think this legislation is a good deal for seniors. But to smear my organization with claims that we frighten the elderly is a tactic that should be beneath The Times.
As reported by your own Washington correspondent in a previous story, many of those other senior-citizens groups that originally supported this income-tax increase and bitterly criticized us have now reversed themselves. That's because our original position is being vindicated by their membership--not because we are "stirring up the pot." Those groups, by the way, are hearing from unhappy moderate-income retirees who are rebelling, not just from wealthy seniors as your editorial asserts.