To the Editor:

In response to Kim Hansen's (Martin County DFL chairwoman) letter to the editor recently: Ms. Hansen states Congressman Walz easily won the 2008 election, and during his campaign, he openly discussed his support for a health care reform bill.

As a part of this discussion, did he also openly talk about his lack of concern regarding the potential use of taxpayer money to fund abortion?

According to Ms. Hansen, "people in this area" need to be reminded of facts. I thought some of you might be interested in these facts:

There are currently three Democrats that serve largely rural congressional districts in Minnesota, Colin Peterson (District 7), James Oberstar (District 8) and Tim Walz (District 1). Of these three, only Tim Walz voted no for the Stupak-Pitts Amendment. The Stupak-Pitts Amendment is a 12-line amendment that prohibits funds authorized under America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200) from being used to pay for abortions, or to cover any part of any health plan that covers abortion.

We can only infer that Walz does not think this safeguard against tax dollars funding abortion is important. His fellow Democratic congressman from small town Minnesota do, and they voted accordingly.

Ms. Hansen reminded "people in this area" that Tim Walz won the 2008 election with a sound majority and his actions represent what the majority want. I'd ask citizens who live in District 1 to consider that recently their congressman has voted more consistently on several key issues with Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, Calif., than with Colin Peterson of Detroit Lakes, Minn.

From his enthusiastic support of the stimulus bill last spring to his vote on Stupak-Pitts, Walz's true colors are coming through during his second (and I hope last) term in office.

Nate Brown

Ceylon