Comments on: How Congress is killing the Post Office

By: ffakr

ffakr — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 00:13:00 +0000

Anonymous mostly nailed the details.
A few others have danced around the analysis.

This is nothing less than an organized attempt to destroy a very successful public institution because it’s existence stands refutes the world-view of the fringe-right free-marketers. I’d call it a conspiracy if it wasn’t so obvious to anyone who cares to look at what they’re doing. They’re not hiding any of these actions with more than a poorly executed wink and a nod.

Comments on various comments so far..
- USPS is profitable RIGHT NOW. Their deficits are artificially encumbered. If they had a realistic requirement for pre-funding, even one that was way more optimistic than any other private sector organization mandates, they would be posting $2B/year profits. Given their pricing=funding model, we’d see postal fee’s decrease if the burden of PAEA were removed.
- USPS now competes favorably on price with UPS, FedEX, etc. Removing the yoke congress intentionally placed around their neck would further hurt private carriers. A more profitable USPS is one that requires less customer funding.
Business over Country.

There are two ideological battles going on here by my reckoning.

1. Like Medicare, removing the burden of profit taking from USPS means operating costs are lower. You can complain about USPS bureaucracy but it’s organic bureaucracy. It’s not the sort of intentional bureaucracy that grows in private firms as management looks for new ways to remove profit. UAL has over 70 VPs in one department when they entered Bankruptcy, and they added more when Management saw a window of opportunity to loot the company closing. [I have many many family members who worked there]
The USPS is unfortunate proof that Government organizations can actually work, and work better than the free market. It’s another stake in the heart the conservative reality and for that it must be destroyed.

2. Without expanding, this is also a strike at another conservative boogieman.. organized labor.

There is one inevitable outcome of we don’t stop this.
Congress will eventually find a way to sell off USPS, at least up until the medical and retirement funds can be co-opted by private firms. Then they’ll be looted, like they’ve been at other companies over and over and over without any repercussions.

We’re watching a slow-motion multi-billion dollar bank robbery and it’s happening right in front of us.

By: lambertstrether

lambertstrether — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:33:00 +0000

The reason “nobody can understand?” Privatizing the Post Office and looting it, of course. Is this really so hard to see?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:51:59 +0000

HR2309 proposed by Representative Darrell Issa may be heard in the House this November
Issa claims he is striving to save the USPS yet he is ignoring expenses that can be deleted without disrupting the service.
#1. The Postal Accountable and Enhancement Act needs to be rescinded. In 2006 the PAEA signed by Bush, mandated that the USPS fund 75 years of retiree health benefits in 10.
#2. Overpayments of 50 to 75 Billion the USPS made to the Civil Service RetirementService should be returned.
#3. Overpayments the USPS made to FERS need to be retrieved.
#4.The USPS needs to charge more for delivering UPS parcels to places UPS don’t.
#5. Adjust the ratio of managers to workers.
#6 Quit giving deep discounts to large businesses. Issa’s solution is to cut the workforce by at least 100,000, and make Postal Workers’ wages and benefits depend on a separate board when a contract isn’t agreed upon. This is a case where Issa’s cure would cause the death of the USPS as a public service and have it revived as a business with lower paid workers, higher rates and less service.
S1789, sponsored by Lieberman, passed in the Senate, but not in the House,would cut 100,000 jobs with the USPS when we don’t need to have more unemployed workers. S1789 would decrease compensation for injured workers and end it for those over 65, when we don’t need to take away compensation or lower compensation for injured workers. It would weaken the unions which promote a “living wage” at a time when we don’t need to add more people to the “working poor”, S1789 would close smaller post offices (some have already closed), and slow mail delivery by closing 200+ distribution centers.
In 2006 Congress voted to have the USPS fund 75 years of retiree health benefits in 10 amounting to 5.5 Billion a year.
Saddled with funding 5.5 Billion a year that had nothing to do with mail delivery, the USPS could no longer have it’s revenue =costs as it had done until 2006.
If this bill is passed or HR2309 the USPS will end up virtually privatized with lower wages and benefits for its ’workers, a scaled down and overworked workforce, more mail services contracted out, less services for the public including curbside service in place of home delivery.
This is how the Post Office could end up privatized if HR2309 were passed.
Management is replaced if they cannot successfully restructure Postal Service finances when the Postal Service fails to pay its bills for more than 30 days, a receivership-style authority takes over for USPS management with an explicit mandate to cut costs while maintaining universal service.

By: SkyeShepard

SkyeShepard — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 03:14:32 +0000

As they do to the country, so do they to the US Postal Service. There is no accountability in our government “leadership.’ I think that they should have an established amount of time to do something about the problems that they are faced with. Like a number system, first in first out. They should’t be able to make laws on items that were introduced well after other things.

Like the contracts they make for construction projects, perhaps the Congress should be fined for the amount of time they go over ‘the limit’ on important political issues. Either that, or just vote these people who are do-nothings out and get some people in there who can make some decisions, difficult or not.

By: SkyeShepard

SkyeShepard — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 03:14:30 +0000

By: Moopheus

Moopheus — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 20:15:48 +0000

To GilpinSteve’s point, part of the continued usefulness of the Post Office is the universality of service–everyone has access to it, and can send and receive mail. A first class letter is still pretty cheap relative to other surface transport options. You can still use it even if you can’t afford Fedex or the internet. It would be an interesting Constitutional argument if the Postal Clause could be read as an obligation to provide some level of universal service. Full privatization would almost certainly lead to service cuts and price raises. Would the government have to guarantee access?

By: GilpinSteve

GilpinSteve — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 18:02:22 +0000

After the expansion of the private carriers, the Post Office is no longer the vital means of communication for all that it once was. However, it has turned into a safety net – it’s how you send mail and packages if you can’t afford FedEx or UPS. Unfortunately, the Post Office’s current gov’t/private hybrid setup doesn’t adapt well to being a safety net. The private aspect of it requires a profit.

Rather than privatizing it further, the government should take over the Post Office in its entirety and run it like other safety nets.

By: Hypenspin

Hypenspin — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 12:07:35 +0000

Congress should lead follow or get out of the way.

Mr Issa is trying to put together a huge plan to shrink the postal service . His motive, to streamline the postal service and sell it to the highest bidder.When that happens, the powers that be will eliminate the prefunding, the fat cats will sweep the table like a Las Vegas dealer. There will be 200,000 more middle class American jobs lost and who knows how many broken homes and foreclosures.

Power to the people.

By: TFF

TFF — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 11:57:38 +0000

I believe that in some countries, the post office offers simple banking services? Could be great for those who are presently unbanked.

By: beast8300

beast8300 — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 03:46:21 +0000

Thank you Kevin. I was starting to wonder if anyone would correct that. Thanks Felix Salmon for the article. You might note that health benefit prefunding has made up 85% of losses since 2007. You might also note that two external, private sector accounting firms have verified that USPS has a $55-$75 billion dollar SURPLUS in its pension funds. If Congress authorized a transfer from the pension surplus to the future retiree health benefit fund, and allow the postal service to offer a variety of services, they would be well on their way back to fiscal health.

By: Kevinb3977

Kevinb3977 — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 01:04:59 +0000

You should know that the pre funding is for health benefits for future retirees. The postal service is required to pay for health benefits for the next 75 yrs and do so within 10.
No other agency has to do so. It has already paid 42 billion dollars into this account. This is NOT being paid into pension funds.

By: Justcarryingon

Justcarryingon — Sat, 21 Jul 2012 00:32:20 +0000

Congress has been robbing the postal service for years.People paid into their pension funds, and these funds are being used for daily operating expenses. “Prefunding” is a scam. Recently,they suggested making federal employees pay 5% more into their pension funds to offset the loss in revenue connected to the lower student loan interest rates.Talk about blatant thievery. These politicians feign outrage at the dismantling of the postal service, but behind closed doors, they have to be in the the scam. Millions of jobs on the line. . . . the postal service is screwed.

By: carterj98

carterj98 — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 22:27:08 +0000

Decent pensions should new right of every American worker,

By: mrzip

mrzip — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 22:23:48 +0000

“Congress requires the Post Office to make inordinately huge pension-plan payments.”

Here’s my opinion/explanation why this was done and why congress won’t consider reversing it.

In 2006, when congress passed this foolish law, the USPS was doing well, financially, and congress was desperate to find ways to lower “the deficit.” Since the USPS receives $0 tax dollars, they couldn’t lower the amount to reduce the deficit. So The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 was their back door way of getting money from the USPS. Then they subtracted the annual $5.5 billion from the deficit. So now if congress considers reversing the annual obligation, they will essentially be raising the deficit. They are between the proverbial rock and a hard place.

Just my 2¢

By: Robocop5626

Robocop5626 — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 21:59:42 +0000

Public sector union members have constantly begged Congressmen for years to intercede on a variety of perceived wrongs on everything from FMLA to actually having to come to work every day. Now that something unpleasant is occurring due to some of the same folks it is deemed “meddling”?