I received no response from Congressman Jacobs, Senator Rockefeller, or their offices, though I received a letter from Senator Byrd. Byrd’s letter acknowledged my contact with his office, and pressed a case for the stimulus legislation by seemingly putting into play a number of terms in a rather Pavlovian fashion. There were “jobs,” “infrastructure,” “local economies,” “working families,” “roads,” “bridges,“ “schools,” “communities,” “long-term [economic] growth,” and “tax cuts.” The senator expressed his sorrow at seeing “this stimulus package referred to as wasteful, pork-barrel spending,” and made mention of “police officers,” “school teachers,” and “firefighters,” whom the stimulus would spare layoff.
The senator’s response did not interact with Ms. McCaughey’s analysis of healthcare-related language in the stimulus bill, or with McCaughey’s prediction that provisions in the bill (as language in the bill then stood) would lead to the rationing of healthcare to seniors. Byrd’s letter did not contain even a single word about healthcare — the topic of concern of my e-mail to his office.