8/2/2019 Post Office Reform NNA Final (2)

1/1

The Truth about Postal Reform

By Reed Anfinson

President of the National Newspaper Association

And Publisher of the Swift County (MN) Monitor-News

Now that US Senate has passed a bill, S 1789, to reform theailing US Postal Service, critics are trying to disable the bill on itsway to the House of Representatives. Business Week recentlycatalogued unhappy stakeholders, including postal unions, postalmanagement and some Republicans who wrongly think the billburdens taxpayers.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-CA, whose own bill awaits action in theHouse, blasted "special interests." But Business Week says,"Considering how many people are unhappy with the bill, it isntclear which special interests Issa is referring to."

Some see the Senate bill as the inevitable product of thesausage machine. But it is neither a budget buster nor processedmeat. It is the expression of a better vision of the Postal Service.

If you consider that survival of the service means maintainingthe circulatory system for a $1.1 trillion mailing industry - or inother words, making sure cash, greeting cards, packages andnewspapers and magazines arrive on time, the Senate bill is goodmedicine.

Consider some of the alternative fixes.Issa's bill would let USPS immediately end Saturday mail, close

half the mail processing centers and thousands of post offices, andput a new board of political appointees in charge. The new boardwould be expected to trim workers' benefits and maybe wages,and direct the Postmaster General to favor profit over service.

At the other extreme might be Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT,whowanted to keep everything open. Labor unions backing him say

that USPS will heal as the economy heals. Then there is the WhiteHouse's notion: to raise postage rates.

For Sens. Susan Collins, R-ME, and Joe Lieberman, I-CT,neither extreme is suited to long-term survival of USPS.

To many experts, Issa's approach is likely to frighten awaybusinesses that mail. The Lieberman-Collins bill agrees that USPSneeds a more flexible, less costly workforce. It keeps mail flowingthrough today's network while cost cutting is underway. Forexample, they would end Saturday mail delivery in two years, butonly if USPS has taken other big steps toward financial viability.They would allow the closing of postal plants now, if USPSpreserves local mail delivery speed.

Is their bill the product of compromise, or of a different vision?

Consider:--The Postal Service's plant-closing plan is based on a desire toamass more mail at automated urban centers, where costlymachines sit idle much of the day. To optimize machines, USPSwould haul mail much farther. But the hauling would slow themailstream, particularly in small towns and rural areas that are farfrom mail plants and create a set of second-class citizens whowould get and send mail more slowly than urban dwellers. Itwould also hamper smaller communities' quests for economicdevelopment.

- Many Americans say they wouldn't miss Saturday mail. USPS builds its system around senders, not receivers. Who wobe hurt by a 5-day delivery regime? Anyone who dependstimely mail delivery. Shutting down the system two days a wthree when Monday holidays occurwould create deaccording to the Postal Regulatory Commission. Then there

those who need prescriptions delivered when they are at hosmall-town citizens who get the newspaper by mail businesses needing 6-day cash flows.

- Closing small post offices seems a no-brainer to city dwelwho spot those one-room POs at the roadside on the way tobeach. Surely not all are needed. But rather than closing tentirely, USPS could have circuit-rider postmasters to open ta few hours a day. That is affordable if worker benefitsbrought into line with the private sector. For those communitiecircuit rider could continue their links to the world.

- The Congressional Budget Office says the Senate bill wocost $33.6 billion, adding to the federal deficit. But postpayers, not taxpayers, carry that burden. Taxpayers face a liabas the funder-of-last resort only if postage revenues dry u

which is more likely to happen if the mail slows to a crawl.Finally, members of Congress may differ on how they

USPS. Is it a corporation? Is it a government agency responsfor binding the nation together?

Fact: it is a Government-Sponsored Enterprise or GSE, mlike Fannie Mae than like IBM or the Defense Department. Itto use business tools, but carry out a public mission. And itenormous power in the marketplace. Consider, for examplenew Every Door Direct Mail program, which directly compwith many private businesses. Members of Congress mistakenly see postal reform as an exercise in deregulatincompany may actually unleash a powerful federal agency, wthose who look to raising postage so generous worker benefits

continue could pull the plug on the economic engine that kejobs alive.

It isn't compromise that is needed, but a clear-eyed vision baon a full understanding of the needs of all whom the PoService serves. Postal management today has an impossible texpected to accomplish business goals without the ccontrolling tools businesses have, and expected to achgovernment ends without federal support. Congress owns confusion. Only Congress can fix it and it will continue to neefine-tune its solutions as communications cultures change. Nopassed today will avoid the need for legislation in the futNeither "deregulating" it nor hiking rates will get USPSstability. Nor will abrupt and disruptive approaches to labor co

Senators Collins and Lieberman, along with co-sponsors TCarper, D-DE, and Scott Brown, R-MA, have devoted endhours to understanding the challenge and to crafting the next stoward fixing it. Their approach deserves considerably mrespect than it is getting.