I was inclined to respond to Charles McCormick's letter to the editor when it first appeared in The Pilot (March 26), but I let it pass. However, since it appeared again as one of the "Lighthouse Letters" letters last Sunday, I -cannot let it pass.

I agree with McCormick that "virtually no member of the voting public nor the run-of-the-mill Congress has anything resembling even a most modest understanding of the health-care legislation just passed." This is understandable for the public but is indefensible for our representatives.

It is not a nonpartisan bill. Republicans had no input in the writing of the bill, only the -president's last-minute "retreat" to give it some appearance of nonpartisan input.

I am not a doctor, nor am I -connected with the medical or insurance industries, but I have studied much of the bill on the Internet. If McCormick has not studied it, as he acknowledges, it seems inappropriate for him to refer to others as "know littles," "senseless," "profane" and having the "abandonment of rationality and good taste."

It is not the lack of compassion that leads me to disapprove of the bill. In fact, it does contain many provisions I agree with. However, these reforms could be resolved with much simpler legislation. It is the bureaucracy created in the bill that is disturbing.

The bill establishes tremendous levels of bureaucracy, including commissioners, commissioners supervising commissioners, boards and intricate trails of approvals, review of approvals, etc. The whole complex system will require tens of thousands of government employees. The ultimate impact is government control over a very large segment of the economy and control over significant personal affairs - which, one suspects, is perhaps the real intent.

William Bancroft

Pinehurst