Curing the Summertime Postal Blues

Curing the Summertime Postal Blues
By Bob Levi
NAPS Director of Legislative and Political Affairs

Late June and early July may have proven to be extraordinarily consequential for the future of the Postal Service and its role in delivering absentee ballots for federal elections. Members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and several federal judges, including justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, expressed their opinions about the agency and how the Postal Service functions within our electoral system.

In the July issue of The Postal Supervisor, I summarized the June 17 Senate confirmation hearings of two of the four presidential nominees to the USPS Board of Governors. As this issue went to press, confirmation for the remaining two nominees had yet to be scheduled. The Senate plans to adjourn for the summer on Aug. 10.

On June 24, Postmaster General David Steiner had his turn before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Steiner reiterated the widely held view that the Postal Service suffers from a broken business model that prevents it from using the same tools employed by profit-seeking companies. The PMG spoke of the burden to deliver mail to more than 170 million delivery points six days a week—most postal routes being "money-losing."

He lamented the inability to close unprofitable post offices. Furthermore, Steiner complained the agency is prohibited from unilaterally raising postage rates, hindered by the archaic Postal Regulatory Commission. The PMG requested legislation enabling the Postal Service to invest its retirement assets in a conservatively managed investment portfolio, rather than be limited to low-yield U.S. Treasury bonds.

Steiner also urged Congress to increase the USPS' borrowing authority, self-manage its workers' compensation program and have the administration recalculate its Civil Service Retirement System liability to reflect that the excess retirement liability was incurred by pre-1971 postal employees and, therefore, should be me shouldered by taxpayers.

As you may remember from my July column, NAPS is advocating for Congress to revise the existing USPS Public Service Appropriation and to provide the funds for specific aspects of the Postal Service's universal service obligation. Steiner supported the appropriation in his testimony.

Members of the Senate panel participated in one round of questioning of the PMG. Chairman Rand Paul (R-KY) focused his queries on cutting the size of the postal workforce and reducing the days of mail delivery to reduce postal expenses. Notably, Paul and Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) suggested elimination of the PRC might provide the Postal Service with improved flexibility, particularly in increasing postage rates.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) mused about reducing the Postal Service's public service obligations as a route to improved solvency. Most of the Democratic members of the committee focused their fire on the Postal Service's intent to comply with President Trump's controversial executive order relating to the USPS' role in delivering absentee ballots.

The order would require the Postal Service to halt delivering ballots to otherwise eligible voters on a state voter list not inspected by federal authorities. During questioning, Steiner indicated he would follow the executive order, but clarified later he would comply with federal court orders.

Toward the end of the hearing, fireworks erupted between Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and the PMG over poor mail service in Missouri and the discovery of a pile of abandoned mail in a vacant St. Louis lot. Hawley was angered by the PMG's failure to be aware of the mail dump, despite the senator allegedly notifying the USPS of the matter and the wide media attention the mail pile generated.

After the hearing, in a letter to Hawley, Steiner claimed the senator's office never notified the PMG of the mail pile, Missouri mail performance was improving and he felt he was treated disrespectfully by the senator. In response, Hawley opened an investigation of the Postal Service, alleging possible criminal acts by the agency using his position as chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism.

One of the last matters discussed at the Senate hearing was the status of the consulting work being conducted by the restructuring firm Alvarez & Marsal. The PMG told Paul the work is not complete and it's unclear when it will be finished. However, Steiner pledged to forward the report to the committee when completed.

On a related Senate matter, Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) alerted Paul and Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) that he plans to place a "blanket hold" on all nominations to the Postal Board of Governors in response to the perceived dismissive way in which postal leadership has treated mail performance issues in South Dakota. With the shrinking number of days left in the legislative session, such a hold would place the four pending Board of Governor nominees in serious jeopardy.

As mentioned earlier, the PMG indicated the Postal Service intends to comply with courts' decisions relating to the executive order on mail absentee ballots. In late June and early July, several federal courts have cast doubt on the legality and constitutionality of the order.

First, two federal district courts have halted implementation because states—not the federal government or the Postal Service — are tasked by the U.S. Constitution with determining voter eligibility. Second, another federal district concluded the Postal Service’s compliance with the executive order would violate a 2021 legal settlement between the agency and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), in which the USPS must employ “extraordinary measures” for the timely delivery of election ballots. Compliance with the executive order would violate this court-order settlement.

Finally, while not directly related to the executive order, on June 29, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a slim 5-4 majority that election authorities may count mailed absentee ballots postmarked by election day, but received after election day. This key ruling sustains current practice in many states, including those that conduct universal vote by mail.

NAPS will continue to protect the Postal Service’s integrity and nonpartisanship in delivering democracy for America. NAPS also will continue safeguarding the Postal Service’s sacred and historic mission to ensure the agency fulfills its universal service obligations. This is the way we cure the summertime postal blues!