President Trump and the Post Office: The real story
Allow me to be rather direct. If you opened this post, you are about to have your level of commitment to finding the truth tested. For a few weeks, I have listened to many Democratic politicians and their surrogates claim that changes being made in U.S. Postal Service operations are intended to make voting by mail ineffective, a failure.
The argument put forth is that this action is driven by Trump’s opposition to voting by mail. (For information, those pushing this argument hardly ever explain that Trump’s opposition is to “universal voting by mail”, not to the usual absentee process.) The Internet is replete with articles to this effect and television news reports are filled with Democrats giving soundbites that vehemently push this narrative. Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, who allowed the House of Representatives to go on recess without finalizing assistance for Americans suffering financial and other hardships because of COVID-19, brought members back early to address the Post Office situation.
Here is the test of your commitment to finding the truth. Facing the task of getting to the truth regarding this matter, I started my usual research process. I came across a newspaper article that explains, in factual and crystal clear terms, what the truth is in this post office squabble. The article was written by the Editorial Board of the Wall Street Journal and is titled, “The Post Office’s Problem Isn’t Trump”. To read it, go to https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-post-offices-problem-isnt-trump-11597360885. You might have to take a short subscription in order to read the full article. It will be inexpensive.
Here are a few excerpts from the article:
Two months into his new job, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy is being keelhauled by Democrats for alleged sabotage of the U.S. Postal Service. Nearly 200 House Democrats signed a letter this week accusing him of acting to “accelerate the crisis” at the USPS. Apparently they missed the post office’s news release last Friday, when it reported losing another $2.2 billion last quarter. Congress has only itself to blame for this mess.
Total losses since 2007 run to $78 billion, according to a May report by the Government Accountability Office, which said that the “USPS’s current business model is not financially sustainable.” It’s a Blockbuster service in a Netflix world.
Overall mail volume peaked in 2006, at 213 billion pieces. As of last year, it was down 33%. More than half of what remains is “marketing mail.” Maybe you noticed while searching for a birthday card amid the real-estate fliers. Over the same period, however, the number of delivery points served by the USPS increased by 9%, from 146 million to 160 million.
“Our financial position is dire,” Mr. DeJoy told the postal Board of Governors last week, “stemming from substantial declines in mail volume, a broken business model and a management strategy that has not adequately addressed these issues.” He emphasized the need to stick to schedules and cut overtime costs. Mr. DeJoy shook up the org chart, with 23 top staff reportedly “reassigned or displaced.” The USPS instituted a “management hiring freeze” and will seek early retirements.
President Trump said Thursday that he opposes extra money for the USPS, since without it, “you can’t have universal mail-in voting, because they’re not equipped to have it.” This is a foolish line to take. Millions of mail ballots are coming, ready or not, and Mr. DeJoy has already insisted that “the Postal Service has ample capacity to deliver all election mail securely and on-time.” The USPS has projected that it won’t run out of cash until 2021.
I, Karl, totally agree with the Journal editors that Trump never should have made a connection between funding and universal mail-in voting. My take on what the Wall Street Journal article presents is that Congress messed the Post Office up and now Democrats are politicizing the Postmaster General’s effort to fix the mess made by Congress. If Trump wins another term, I suppose Democrats will seek to impeach him because of this effort to make the post office efficient and effective.
6 responses to “President Trump and the Post Office: The real story”
Leave a Reply
Please read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution to learn why the Postal Service was established and what it’s mission is. The entire Board of Governors that has oversight responsibility of the USPS was appointed by President Trump. Given these facts someone please explain to me how Congress is to blame for ” Post Office mess “
Trump is his own worst enemy; his ungoverned mouth and thumbs often spout comments that are easily misconstrued and used against him. Makes me wonder where his political advisers are. I guess they’re there; he just ignores them.
While I can see some of the beneficial things he’s done, his behavior and comments disturb me. It also disturbs me that Christians are so closely linked with him and am worried that association will harm Christianity in times to come.
We’re fast coming up on another election that offers no candidate I can feel good about voting for.
There are numerous print and video resources that explain how Congress created the post office “mess”. One article, in particular, covers the subject well. It is “Their view: Congress messed up the Post Office” by Barry Ritholtz. (Click the title to view full article.) Here are rather extensive excerpts:
Let’s start with the USPS mandate: It was formed with a very different directive than its private-sector competitors, such as FedEx and United Parcel Service. Those two giant private shippers, along with a bevy of smaller ones, are for-profit companies that can charge whatever they believe the market will bear. The USPS, by contrast, is charged with delivering to every home and business in America, no matter how remote. And it can charge only what Congress allows; increases require approval.
It also has congressional pressure and oversight on where it must maintain postal offices. The USPS has been slowly closing sites with insufficient customer demand. But closing an obsolete or little-used facility invariably entails a battle with each representative, who in turn faces voter anger when a local post office is targeted for closing. FedEx or UPS can open or close locations with little problem as demand and package traffic dictate.
Then there is the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006, which some have taken to calling “the most insane law” ever passed by Congress. The law requires the Postal Service, which receives no taxpayer subsidies, to pre-fund its retirees’ health benefits for 75 years into the future — this covers the health cost of employees not yet hired and, in many cases, not even born yet. If that doesn’t meet the definition of insanity, I don’t know what does. This $5 billion annual cost is a requirement that no other entity, private or public, has to make. Without this obligation, the Post Office actually turns a profit. Some have called this a “manufactured crisis.” It’s also significant that lots of companies benefit from burden that make the USPS less competitive; these same companies might also benefit from full USPS privatization, a goal that has been pushed by several conservative think tanks for years.
Paying retiree obligations isn’t the issue here; rather, being singled out as the only company with a congressional requirement to fully fund those obligations is.
Unlike private-sector entities, the Postal Service is barred from lobbying. Similar restrictions do not apply to FedEx or UPS or other carriers.
The Post Office has broad limitations about making routine business decisions that its private-sector competitors do not.
By way of summary, USPS: Delivers everywhere, but can only charge what Congress allows, while receiving no taxpayer subsidies; has to fight congressional representatives in order to close insufficiently utilized post offices; is unfairly burdened by the Postal Accountability Act of 2006; is barred from lobbying Congress; faces broad limitations regarding routine business decisions. Given that Congress is filled with people seeking to gain and hold power by pleasing voters, the conditions listed here have produced, and perpetuate, a “mess” for the post office.
Unfortunately we are once again basing our decisions on articles written by a partisan. The truth is better found by going back to the Postal Reform Act of 2006 which was introduced in Congress by Tom Davis (R of VA.) and signed into law by President George W. Bush. In fairness I wish to state that the law enjoyed bipartisan support. The law was doable at the time it was passed but that was pre-Great Recession and pre-Covid 19 both of which had negative effects on the execution of the law. As a result of the failure of the Postal System to make the adjustments it needed to make a fight ensued between the Postal Union and the Congress. The independent I.G. has identified the problem but does not call it a Postal “mess” nor did he lay the blame to any party. This then leaves us with blame being tossed back and forth with no resolution. This in my estimation points out the problem with using articles that are written by others rather than doing primary source research to prove your point. Articles are opinions but the Constitution and the Law are facts.
With regard to all of you are disturbed by President Trump’s sometimes tone and choice of words, I will point out the fact that he is basically his own defense. The media has abandoned all objectivity and are 99% against him. Their bias has deteriorated into disrespect, missrepresentation, and avoidance of reporting his accomplishments and the truth. To expect him to be like George the mute Bush would be political suicide and not the person for whom I voted. I expect him to put America first and not mince words. He is the best we have ever had, and they (Democrats) are the worst we have ever had.
Congress doesn’t really care if the Post Office loses money, because the federal government always run a deficit and just adds to the national debt. We could all do without Saturday delivery, but Congress will not allow it to be discontinued.