Your Lefts and Rights: Healthcare

President Obama has already written his name into the history books as a major success, but that was as a candidate. To write his name in the pages of history as a successful or, in the very least, productive president, he must oversee the passing of a healthcare reform bill. If he and his party cannot get something passed with a huge Senate and House majority (as well as the most liberal president since Jimmy Carter), failure is the word historians would be forced to use. This ultimatum with history can account for the sense of urgency with the left to get something accomplished and the sense of urgency with the right to make sure they get their names written in too.
What I have boiled all the mudslinging down to is this: left-wing folks believe that healthcare is a right that should be bestowed to Americans upon birth and citizenship and right-wing folks believe that government should be a safety net of sorts and not "give" anything away. As with most issues, both sides have a distinct point of view, and it becomes somewhere between excruciatingly difficult and impossible to find any common ground.
It is no secret to anyone that when government programs are created, they must be funded; healthcare will be no different. If the bill is passed into law, the money will come from somewhere. Obama says that with cuts in wasteful spending in the broken system that we already have, his new plan will mostly pay for itself. I say mostly because although Obama never makes any references to tax hikes or new taxes in his elegant speeches, it doesn't mean they won't come.
Concealed inside the massively complicated bill that is currently on the Senate floor, there are many mentions of new taxes. These tax hikes in a time of economic trouble is enough for most conservatives to turn a cheek to Obamacare. And I don't blame them one bit. I could see tax hikes being proposed with a straight face in a time of economic prosperity when most people aren't pinching pennies, but at this juncture it seems to be an amateur political move to even attempt. Score this point for the right wing.
One argument I have heard for the passing of healthcare reform that I find intriguing is the notion of being on the right side of history. Many Democratic senators, most notably the Senate majority leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., have stated that throughout history there have been conservatives who have tried to slow progress in areas like slavery, women's rights, civil rights, Medicare and Medicaid, and they are now trying to do the same thing. While I think that Senator Reid hyperbolized when comparing healthcare to the aforementioned topics, his remark should be noted as viable. It is the same mindset, regardless of the severity of the pending issue.
Of course, the counter to this is simply that the minority wants to make sure something worthwhile and effectively beneficial gets put through and that would be understandable if it were true. Given the right being in a position of power during much of the previous administration and not muttering the words healthcare and reform in the same sentence, I don't think any conservative is going to bring a new plan to the floor if talks were to die tomorrow. The left wing has this one, no doubt.
With the score tied up on the two side's biggest points, the fiscal responsibility that the right preaches and the moral responsibility that the left preaches, the tiebreaker comes ironically from both positions. As a pure numbers game, it is irresponsible and naïve to think that the country can afford to give 300 million people high quality healthcare without major cuts in other areas and or more taxes. In a perfect world where money was aplenty, I don't think anyone would object to the noble cause of making sure everyone has access to healthcare, but there is a reality to be considered. That reality clearly states that money, like all resources, is scarce and must be allocated accordingly. This does not mean we cannot fix our broken system and include more people in it. I would think that enacting laws making it illegal for a small group of insurance companies to hold the majority of health insurance business, thus given the customer more options, would lower premiums and make it affordable for more people. Some sort of anti-gouging law against hospitals so that insurance companies would have to pay less money for every medical bill would also bring down premiums.
It is clear that something needs to be done, but it needs to be done with financial reality as every politician's closest advisor.

Tyler Goodwin is a sophomore Business Administration and Justice Studies major at UNH. With this column he hopes to show that it is possible to solve major issues without being divisive or following the doctrine of specific political groups.