Letter to the Editor: Government-Run Does Not Equal Socialism

Dear Editor:

I am tired of hearing the word “socialism” tossed around negatively in the debate about health care reform.

After reading many definitions, I’ve reached the conclusion that any system of society where goods and services are controlled by the government or a collective can be considered socialist.

Through numerous discussions with people, I’ve realized how terrified people are of a socialist take-over. But don’t these people realize that public education, libraries, and Medicare are all government run programs? Thus, maybe a “socialist take-over” wouldn’t be so bad. How is having an option of public health insurance any different than having an option of public education over private? Is education more essential than health?

I cannot even imagine how scary it is living without insurance. I also do not want to fear losing my coverage or not being able to afford coverage when I am dropped from my parents’ plan.

There is something wrong when a so-called First World nation has 47 million people, including 8.7 million children, without health care.

It’s also unfortunate that the health care system is motivated by profit and not care; thus, health care officials drop and deny patients whenever they get a chance.
No wonder so many people go into debt because of our failing system.

I invite everyone to write and call their senators demanding quality and affordable health care for all.

Also, if you are interested in getting involved with the action, join the University of Mary Washington Chapter of the Virginia Organizing Project. For more info about the organization email me at ngrossma@mail.umw.edu.

Natalie Grossman is a junior.