The lead two paragraphs of your editorial “Sanders’ housing proposal adds up to little but trouble,” Sept. 19, page C4, contain two inaccurate and disingenuous “straw men” regarding Senator Sanders proposals on health care in particular and his economic policies in general.

The first is your allegation that Sanders is proposing a “government takeover of the nation’s health care system “ is patently false. Medicare for all, the system being advocated by both Senators Sanders and Warren, wound not create a “government run health care system,” such as the one in the United Kingdom, where all doctors, nurses, and other kinds of health care providers become government employees. Instead, what Medicare for all actually does is a government takeover of the medical insurance business like Canada did decades ago. The Canadian experience has shown that universal coverage, an overall healthier population with better health care outcomes can both be achieved at significantly reduced cost to both government and individuals by socializing health insurance.

The second unjustifiable allegation occurs in your second paragraph "...like so much in the socialists senators command and control arsenal, his plan does not not make any kind of real sense...”. The implication of this, of course, is that Independent, Democratic Socialist Senator from the well known communist bastion of neighboring Vermont has proposed a “command economy” like the former Soviet Union had where the government makes all determinations about what is to be produced, in what quantities and how and to whom it will be distributed. Again your piece descends into hyperbolic inaccuracy. Sanders has proposed nothing of the kind. National rent control, expanding affordable housing with a government supported construction program and Medicare For All simply does not add up to a “command economy” as you contend.

Criticize any candidate for office’s proposals as you see fit. But do your readers the courtesy of avoiding grossly misrepresenting a candidate’s actual position to justify your opposition.

Ed Collins, Springfield