To the Editor:
In his editorial, "Stating the Obvious," (The Dartmouth, September 27), Jacques Hebert touched upon a crucial point -- both candidates, and the parties at large, are laying out large, sweeping agendas without fully explaining what they mean. Many candidates, mainly on the left as we conservatives prefer that our government do as little as possible, propose initiatives without thinking them through.
A common one, and perhaps the least thought out, is the leftist cry of "healthcare for everyone." Ignoring for the moment who is going to pay for it, how would "healthcare" be defined in such a program? For instance, is it simply routine physicals and exams? Does it include neo-natal care? Emergency care? Keeping a family member on life-support in a terminal case? And most crucially, what about prescription drugs? Do you care if your tax dollars pay for a heart patient's Lipitor? Probably not. But how about the college drop-out who needs to smoke an ounce a week to treat his "glaucoma"? Should the government be picking up that tab?
Another common plea is for education. The same question arises: what is education? Does it include pre-school, HEADSTART, college guidance, law school, etc., or simply K-12 and then you're done? Obviously, not everybody is cut out for grad school, or even college, so would the federal government be obligated to pay for these services as well, when nearly half the country would be unable to benefit for them? The list of programs goes on, each with its own unanswered questions. Both sides have put the horse ahead of the cart, offering solutions, subsidies and handouts for problems that they can't even fully define. The right has built an impressive power base in the last 40 years by finding innovative solutions to similar problems, while the left has pursued an aggressive agenda of rights-discovery, self-enhancement, and imploring America to "shave its Bush."
If Kerry hopes to win come November, he needs an innovative, well-constructed, clearly defined domestic agenda (that makes no mention of Vietnam), and time is against him. Regardless of the outcome, unless both sides draw up a detailed, coherent plan of action for every important issue in the country today, politics will not evolve beyond the mudslinging that we have been inundated with for the last nine months.
