PHOENIX — The head of the state’s indigent care system is warning that a ballot measure to protect individual choice could end up killing his program.

 Anthony Rodgers said the language of Proposition 101 ``is so vague, so sweeping’’ as to leave the door open to an argument that the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System can no longer function as a managed care organization, paying private entities to provide care for the poor. He said that could force the state to go to a fee-for-service arrangement and possible cost the state $1 billion a year.

 But Jeff Singer, the Phoenix  doctor who crafted the measure, called the claims ``totally bogus’’ and said that Rodgers — and his boss, Gov. Janet Napolitano — know that. He said the opposition comes because Proposition 101 would constitutionally bar the state from ever forcing Arizonans into the kind of single ``universal’’ health care program that Napolitano wants.

 Gubernatorial press aide Jeanine L’Ecuyer confirmed that, ``in concept, she likes universal health care.’’

 ``But the devil’s in the details,’’ she continued. ``It depends on what plan you’re looking at.’’

 The warning, which L’Ecuyer said has the governor’s backing comes in a three-page letter Rodgers sent Thursday to newspaper editorial boards.

 Proposition 101 seeks to add a provision to the stat constitution saying that ``no law shall be passed that restrict a person’s freedom of choice of private health care systems or private plans of any type.’’ It also would forbid the state from mandating that people obtain health insurance or force them to pay a penalty.

 AHCCCS is not a private system or private plan. But it doe contract with private hospitals and private plans to provide car for those whose income is below the federal poverty level.

 Rodgers said the lack of definitions in the proposal could lead a court to believe that AHCCCS cannot force those who are enrolled to get their care only through that network of private provider who contract with his agency.

 Singer said Rodgers is simply trying to scare people into killing the measure, pointing out that he terms like ``could’’ and ``might’’ in his memo.

 ``I’m surprised they’re not blaming the mortgage meltdown and th Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Prop 101,’’ he said. Singer said

 AHCCCS is a public health plan and that nothing in the measure precludes it from telling those who get care through the plan that the state will pay only if they get their care through th network of private doctors and hospitals approved by the agency.

 Tom Betlach, the agency’s deputy director, said there is nothing improper about the move. He said AHCCCS is not urging people to vote against the measure — or even trying to convince editorial writers to editorialize against it — but simply doing it ``fiduciary duty’’ to warn of potential unseen implications fro the ``vague language’’ in Proposition 101.

 Rodgers isn’t the only one raising questions. The Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association has formed a committee t raise money to urge voters to defeat the measure and is hoping to raise money from private health care plans that have contracts t provide care to AHCCCS recipients.

 Rivers said the denials by Singer that Proposition 101 would dismantle AHCCCS is undermined by a letter that Eric Novack, th other doctor involved in crafting the measure, wrote to The Arizona Republic last year blasting the ``loss of freedom’’ t those enrolled to pursue any care that has not been approved.

 Singer said that letter was a direct response to efforts by House Minority Leader Phil Lopes, D-Tucson, to force all Arizonans into an AHCCCS-like plan and prohibit other kinds of insurance.