Had to?  That suggests you had no way out. But Senator twelve of your colleagues voted NO. So could possibility the "had to" include holding up your end of a deal? Support for future career aspirations for going along? Sen Jim Marleau,who introduced the bill redistricting certainly is much more favorable for his job security.
Oh and look who is on the Redistricting Committee!
Or maybe fear of reprisal by the Governor and his "black prince" Randy Richardville? Possibly the threat of a Primary with their candidate? Or to
throw in the unimaginable, could you just be THAT uninformed??  Whatever your reasons, clearly you are not listening to your constituents.

You need to sit down with Chairman Marleau or Richardville

That would make for an interesting conversation! Perhaps they need to sit down with their constituents instead!

The majority of these "reasons" from your e-mail Senator sound more like from Marleau/Richardvilles' lips to your ears. Could this explain why when folks e-mailed their Senator in opposition to SB693 the e-mails responses from those Senators who voted Yes contain the same reasons?

But let's continue on and see who is less than truthful

and get a good understanding of just why we had to do it to protect you. Damage control if we lose the battle in courts. Damage control if we lose in 2012 elections.

Damage Control? Senator Jones Obama Care is the damage!

True Republicans(who actually adhere to their Party Platform) and certainly Conservatives of which there are a good many in your District, understand their best method of protection is to fight the good fight doing everything in their power to hinder/stop it, not help it along. If this is what you call protection, we all better duck and take cover!

Here are some examples Senator of those more concerned with the people than possible future-looking-more-and-more-unlikely "damage control" or their careers.

For you and the Governor... Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Texas Gov. Rick Perry flat-out said "No!" In August Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback ordered that $32 million in PPACA exchange grants be returned, and Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin returned $55 million in April. Florida's Gov. Rick Scott, has rejected $2 million in federal grants. South Carolina Governor Haley said the federal plan is not the right fit for the state and has declined to accept millions of federal funds to set up a medical insurance exchange and will also let key deadlines pass.

Heck Senator even a Democrat governor refused the money! And On Sept, 27, 2011 the AP reported that Arkansas Democrat Governor, Mike Beebe is unlikely to seek a $3.8 million grant to research how to establish a health insurance exchange in Arkansas.

Or how about....According to National Council of State Legislators, "In response to the federal health reform law, now known as the Affordable Care Act (ACA),...some members of at least 45 state legislatures have proposed legislation to limit, alter or oppose selected state or federal actions."

As of Sep 04 2011, only sixteen states and Washington D.C. have accepted federal funds thus far, to establish health care exchanges according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

We are the ones with the courage to fight for Michigan tax payers.

Really Rick? Courage? I would say the courageous ones were those who resisted the Governor's thumb screws and/or goodies and voted with the people against SB693.

As far as taxpayers..

According to Cato Institute health care policy expert Michael Cannon testified before the Missouri Senate's Interim Committee on Health Insurance Exchanges on why that state should not create an Obamacare exchange..."to create an exchange is to create a taxpayer-funded lobbying group dedicated to fighting repeal. An exchange's employees would owe their power and their paychecks to this law. Naturally, they would aid the fight to preserve the law."

You also voted for:
House Bill 5014: Appropriations
To appropriate an extra $366.3 million for several items, including $9.8 million from a federal grant to create a state "Obamacare exchange" to administer federal "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" subsidies. Also included is $119 million that is nearly all federal money for incentive payments to health care providers and facilities to adopt state-approved electronic health care record systems. The bill also appropriates the money froma new 1 percent tax on health insurance claims designed to "game" the federal Medicaid system to get higher federal payments to Michigan's medical welfare system, and additional amounts for related items.

Second, declaring the law unconstitutional but then accepting the funding it offers and creating an exchange undermines the credibility of state officials seeking to overturn the law and also undermines the lawsuits themselves. One federal judge who overturned the law wrote that the fact that some of the plaintiff states are themselves implementing the law undercuts their own argument that he should order the federal government to halt implementation. From Mackinaw Policy Center located in Michigan

Gee Senator do you think Senate Resolution 95 that Passed 20 to 17 in the Senate on November 10, 2011, to declare that the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act "violates the U.S. Constitution, including the Ninth and Tenth Amendments and the constitutional principles of federalism and dual sovereignty on which this nation was founded," and urge its repeal or invalidation.,fits that description?

I guess those that voted yes on SB 693, Senate Resolution 95 and HB 5014 thought of everything when it came to implementing Obama Care in Michigan!

That would be you Senator but lets give credit where credit is due!

Other Senators who voted Yes for on SB 693, Senate Resolution 95 and *HB 5014(with the exception of Meekhof)

Jansen Pappageorge Hansen Richardville Booher Hildenbrand Jones Caswell Kahn Emmons Marleau *Meekhof Green

Oh here is some courage Senator... "Second as I noted in a recent article, states can also stop federal exchanges by threatening to pull the licenses of health insurers which intend to participate in them (p. 58 of this version). The law defines a "qualified health plan" as one that is "licensed and in good standing in each State...", and only qualified health plans can participate in exchanges.

Hey with Republicans like this who needs Democrats?!

If we do not begin to set up the IT network then the Feds will take over.

Health policy expert John Graham of the Pacific Research Institute wrote on Sept 22, 2011 "State politicians are no longer fooled by the argument that if they do no collaborate to establish state-based exchanges, the federal government will enter their state and do it for them. Recent close reading of the law has debunked this notion. As written, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) has (at least) two clauses that will prevent this from happening ...The likelihood of exchanges being up and running by January 2014 is vanishingly close to zero. Indeed, they may not exist at all except in very few states -- whether or not President Obama wins re-election.

Oh and guess what Senator? The Health Care Exchange IS already taken over by the Feds

1. The federal government controls exchanges.

2. The federal government controls the doctors and other providers that are allowed to participate in an exchange-offered plan
[States] will surrender [their] 10th amendment sovereignty by establishing an exchange According to Jack McHugh Mackinac Policy Center in your own state

You would have us help the Federal take over by not acting!!!???

Evidently Senator Jones, the only ones helping the Feds are those who are helping to implement a Health Care Exchange here in Michigan.
That would be you.

So you see Senator, us ordinary citizens DO understand "why we had to do what we did."

And the coup de gras...

You will damage your movement by spreading lies.