I previously wrote David Price after learning of HR 676‘s reintroduction this year, and received no response (not even a paltry form letter sent by an intern). Since the issue is back on the table, I decided to give it another shot. Feel free to borrow some of my ideas.
I am writing you a second time about HR 676, the Expanded and Improved Medicare For All Act  which your colleague John Conyers is yet again introducing, and to request that you cosponsor the legislation.
As you are likely aware, Senator Sanders has announced plans to introduce either a Medicare for All or Public Option in the Senate in the coming weeks. With the collapse (and moreso with the grumblings of revival) of the AHCA efforts, it is my opinion that the time is ripe for Democrats to show that they are still capable of pushing for social progress, instead of merely defending the status quo as seems to be their way in recent years.
My hope is that strong support for HR676 in the House will result in a Senate version, instead of a watered-down Public Option that is, purely from a financial perspective, doomed to failure as it would be forced to take on the sickest citizens and would not have the needed clout to effectively manage costs.
Although I was unable to take off of work to attend any of your recent Town Halls, I was glad to read  that several of my fellow constituents asked about your stance on single-payer and called upon you to support Medicare for All. I was, however, disappointed hearing that your response was not one of support, but a declaration it was off limits for another 20 years.
A progressive party cannot progress society if they lack forward thinking ideals and goals. I fear that the democratic party has now become a conservative party, fiercely defending the status quo, attacking progressive politics, and having the mere appearance of progressiveness relative only to the republican party now that it has devolved into a regressive party of neofascists.
Although it is true we still need to defend and expand basic access to healthcare, and perhaps the bill would be dead on arrival this session, I still believe your party supporting it would go a long way toward repairing your tarnished image with the public, possibly ensuring strong wins in the House and the ability to push positive legislation come 2019.
There is also the human cost — at a time when the majority of your constituents support a single-payer system, when insurance company profits are bolstered by the private-industry bailout of the ACA, when real health care costs are unaffordable for far too many despite nominally having insurance — you ask us to suffer and die destitute upon the streets for twenty more years before even considering the idea that profit and human health are incompatible?
Economic reality supports single-payer sooner than later as well — all resources expended enhancing the intrinsically broken for-profit healthcare industry instead of building up a public not-for-profit one is wasted, and with each year the population grows and ages, and the problem of building a public system sufficient for all becomes that much more financially disruptive; perhaps insurmountable.
We simply do not have time as a society to delay more than another four years (and even that is too long, but your party decided against single-payer when there was a chance, and I suspect the current President wouldn’t be amenable to signing such a bill). If the discussion is not started now, the prospects for passage in time to save the country from a public health crisis not seen since the 19th century seem dim.
I end my plea with a warning — I suspect you are aware of the strong support for Sanders during the 2016 primary in your district, and the growing disaffection with status-quo democrats. A failure to take a stand for something so popular reinforces the perception that your party no longer cares to represent the common citizen.
I am already leaning toward lending material support to any more progressive primary challenger for your seat, and your refusal to make a stand with HR676 will certainly seal that decision. The North Carolina Green Party also may very well have ballot access in 2018 (emboldened by a recent 11th circuit ruling  they have now filed to overturn our ballot access laws as unconstitutional ), so you may no longer rest easy, assured that your gerrymandered constituency will re-elect you without challenge.