Hear It Online

Mr. Hershinson's question - Health Care Reform and the U.S. Postal Service

On August 11, 2009 President Barack Obama held a Health Care Town Hall in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. During the Town Hall President Obama was asked the following question from a Mr. Ben Hershinson:

“Mr. President, you’ve been quoted over the years — when you were a senator and perhaps even before then — that you were essentially a supporter of a universal plan. I’m beginning to see that you’re changing that. Do you honestly believe that? Because that is my concern. I’m on Medicare, but I still worry that if we go to a public option, period, that the private companies, the insurance companies, rather than competing — because who can compete with the government; the answer is nobody. So my question is do you still — as yourself, now — support a universal plan? Or are you open to the private industry still being maintained?”

This was Mr. Hershinson’s question. President Obama began his answer by defining the differences between a ‘universal’ plan and ‘single-payer’ plan.

During this segment of his reply President Obama stated, “I’m not promoting a single-payer plan”.

President Obama then goes on to say, “I am promoting a plan that will assure that every single person is able to get health insurance at an affordable price, and that if they have health insurance they are getting a good deal from the insurance companies.”

So it is fair to conclude, from what President Obama said, that what President Obama does support is a public insurance company, a public option, that will compete against private insurance companies, “Now, the only thing that I have said is that having a public option in that menu would provide competition for insurance companies to keep them honest.”

Remember the original question:

“I’m on Medicare, but I still worry that if we go to a public option, period, that the private companies, the insurance companies, rather than competing — because who can compete with the government; the answer is nobody. So my question is do you still — as yourself, now — support a universal plan? Or are you open to the private industry still being maintained?”

It had been some time since Mr. Hershinson had asked his question. Perhaps President Obama had been stalling, formulating a reasonable response all the while he speaking.

Our President rephrased the question from Mr. Hershinson in the following way, “How can a private company compete against the government?”

Indeed, you don’t have to have a degree in economics from Harvard to understand you can have private insurance or public insurance but you can’t have both.

President Obama must have been prepared for such a question. It was inevitable that someone would ask how it would be possible for any private insurance company to stay in business competing against the U.S. Government. Doubtlessly this situation was planned for, an answered must have been formulated earlier.

After all, you never put yourself in a position to take a question you don’t an an answer for in politics.

What the audience heard initially seemed well tailored, a professionally scripted answer that would have done any populist proud:

“My answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining — meaning taxpayers aren’t subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services and a good network of doctors, just like any other private insurer would do — then I think private insurers should be able to compete. They do it all the time.”

Then President Obama said the darnedest thing:

“I mean, if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are. It’s the post office that’s always having problems.”

What? Why would the President of the United States disparage the most well known of government agencies? The USPS’s first incarnation was established by Benjamin Franklin in Philadelphia in 1775 by decree of the Second Continental Congress. It isn’t like the President just threw the Department of Education under the bus, it was the Post Office.

And the audience laughed. President Obama was right, who could worry about a public anything putting any private company out of business.

That’s ridiculous.

This analogy was carefully crafted. It wasn’t a slip, an accident, or unintended.

This analogy is a well crafted political tool designed to disarm opponents. This is the kind of thing that people take to water cooler conversations, even if you had never been aware of the Health Care Town Hall in Portsmouth chances are good you heard about President Obama’s slip up in admitting public institutions can’t compete with private enterprises.

Anyone who listens to Conservative Talk Radio was certainly made aware of President Obama’s unintended admission that the private sector provides good and services better than the public sector.

It was like ant poison, the ants take the bait home and consume it. Lovely. The Post Office gaffe is a reverse talking point. It’s a talking point your adversary takes comfort in, and it isn’t until to late that your opponent realizes the joke is on them.

Remember what I said earlier? You don’t have to have a degree in economics from Harvard to understand you can have private insurance or public insurance but you can’t have both.

That’s common sense, and when Conservatives make that argument it is a home run. The light comes on and people understand the real threat a public option represents.

Whatever else is true, if a public option comes into being it will only be a matter of time before private insurance is a thing of the past and all that will be left is single payer. Single payer will be the only game in town. Public option should scare people, and when explained for what it is it does.

That’s what makes the U.S. Postal Service gaffe such an effective tool, it makes the public option look weak and non threatening.

It wasn’t until today that I got it.

Today I was listening to the Sean Hannity radio program and a Liberal caller used the Post Office argument. This isn’t the first time I’ve heard a Liberal caller to a Conservative talk radio show use the Post Office argument. Sean, a bright guy, was put off balance by the analogy. Why would a Liberal seminar caller bring up the U.S. Post Office? On the surface it doesn’t make a lot of sense, until you see what the real purpose behind the talking point is.

This is how you handle the ‘post office can’t compete so don’t get all excited about the public option’ talking point.

First, it isn’t a apples to apples comparison.

There has been a U.S. Postal Service for over 200 years. FedEx and UPS came into existence as a response to problems the USPS had delivering business packages and important documents quickly.

But imagine that for over 200 years FedEx and UPS had been in existence, and had been doing quite well until recently.

Around 60 years ago people complained that not everyone could afford to mail packages and the federal government stepped in and set up a government program that would take care of the problem, but that program was mismanaged and is now broke.

Over the past 100 or so years each state had passed laws which created a different set of rules for each state’s FedEx and UPS offices.

It would also be illegal for the FedEx office of one state to send and receive packages from a different state. (This was President Obama’s analogy not mine)

Even worse, the rules the FedEx and UPS offices follow are extremely byzantine and only a lawyer could understand then. If a UPS or FedEx employee makes a mistake they could be sued. The susceptibility of FedEx and UPS offices and employees to frivolous lawsuits has resulted into there coming into existence an entire class of lawyers who profit from the situation.

It’s the year 2009 and it has become exceedingly expensive, nearly impossible, to mail a package or an important document.

What would you did to fix the problem?

As I wrote earlier FedEx and UPS came into existence as a response to problems the USPS had delivering business packages and important documents quickly.

It would not be logical to create a government run postal service to solve the problems that the government was instrumental in creating in the first place. That would be crazy.

While the Postal Service argument is a smart talking point it can easily be countered with the truth, once you understand what it really is.

And this takes us back to Mr. Hershinson’s question.

“I’m on Medicare, but I still worry that if we go to a public option, period, that the private companies, the insurance companies, rather than competing — because who can compete with the government; the answer is nobody. So my question is do you still — as yourself, now — support a universal plan? Or are you open to the private industry still being maintained?”

Specifically, the last part of the question:

“Are you open to the private industry still being maintained?”

Our President should have done Mr. Hershinson the honor of answering clearly and truthfully.