I worked for the state for more than 35 years and we negotiated our working conditions for a very long time.

Each time. it was a little give and take and we paid for our health insurance benefits by accepting lower pay increases, going without pay increases in three of the last five years plus smaller pay increases in the years before that so as to keep these benefits.

These benefits have been a condition of employment for many years to take them away now would negate all the negotiations that have gone on over the years. If the Legislature wants to negotiate directly with state employees it should change the system that has been in place for many years. Why negotiate only to have changes make at the whim of lawmakers? If the Legislature wants to cut benefits, it should be for employees hired from now on not taken away from those who have worked long and hard to keep them.

An active state employee pays $4,293.36 annually for his spouse and child. I retired from the state and, because I cannot get Medicare, I pay $7,657.08 for my wife; we both pay deductibles and co-pays.

It seems to me very often when the budget comes up short state employees are made out to be overpaid villains. Maybe the blame should be put on those that are in charge or looking after our money. This small state does not need two houses in the Legislature; how about just one?

Albert D. Libby

Winthrop