WhatFinger


Sacrifice?

Issa proposes end of door-to-door mail delivery; congressional freakout in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .



Remember, the U.S. Postal Service is bleeding cash to the tune of $15.9 billion a year. And unlike most federal bureaucrats, Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe is looking for ways to cut costs. (Granted, the government could get rid of the Postal Service and privatize the whole thing, but for now let's deal with today's reality of a government agency that is still operating and at least trying to be more cost-effective.)
So Congressman Darrell Issa (R-California), who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, proposes to save as much as $4.5 billion a year by eliminating door-to-door delivery. Now understand, he is not talking about ending home delivery in general. He's simply proposing that deliveries be made to a box at the curb or to a common set of boxes at a central neighborhood location, as opposed to a mailbox that sits right outside your door or is mounted to the outside of your house.
The Postmaster General's office estimates labor-intensive door-to-door delivery costs an average $353 a year. Curbside delivery averages $224; cluster boxes, just $160. The Postal Service, currently making 54 million curbside deliveries and 40 million to cluster boxes and central locations, has been moving toward collective deliveries at shopping malls, business parks and newer residential developments.

Support Canada Free Press


"A balanced approach to saving the Postal Service means allowing USPS to adapt to America's changing use of mail,'' Issa said in a statement. "Done right, these reforms can improve the customer experience through a more efficient Postal Service."
This is the way 60 percent of us already get our mail, but it would force another 40 percent - mainly those who live in older homes from a time when neighborhoods did not come with curbside boxes as standard equipment - to adapt to change as well. This is the sort of thing that usually brings a quick and sharp congressional rebuke, which is what happened when Donahoe proposed ending Saturday home delivery to save around $2 billion a year. Members of Congress took the opportunity to play superhero by quickly blocking any such action, thus ensuring the continuation of a service that many Americans like but don't really need, while foiling a rare effort by a federal employee to save some money. How would Issa's proposal affect those 40 percent who could no longer get mail delivered right to their doors? It would essentially require two things: 1. You'd have to go get a curbside stand and box, assuming you don't already have one, which is the reason mail is coming right to your door. They're not that expensive. My house came with one but once you become a victim of teenagers playing mailbox baseball, you quickly learn you can get the stand and the box at Home Depot for as little as $30, and it just takes a little time and muscle to put them in the ground. I suppose a lot of those affected would be older people who live in older homes, many of whom could get help from their children, younger neighbors, fellow church members or whoever they know. Then again, it's not that complicated and lots of people 70 or older are perfectly capable of installing a mailbox post. 2. You would have to go to the curb to get your mail. Now, yes, this is a small inconvenience you didn't used to have. And that introduces another question: Is the federal government ever willing to tell Americans that, for the sake of budget integrity, they will have to experience the tiniest hardship, sacrifice or inconvenience they did not previously endure? Walking to the curb to get your mail instead of getting it at your door . . . talk about First World problems. Issa allows for a hardship exception for those with legitimate health-related issues, and I can see a gigantic opportunity for fraud there. He also offers the option that you could get mail delivered to your door for an extra fee. The idea is not to punish people. It's to find ways to make the Postal Service economically viable. But I will be surprised if Congress as a whole stands for this. A guiding principle of the American political class is that Americans must never be asked to accept any burden, no matter how tiny, for the sake of budgetary integrity. Walking to the curb to get your mail is akin to having your skin boiled in acid as far as they are concerned, and they will stand and fight for your right to receive a super-premium service from a federal agency that is going broke delivering it. If Issa's proposal really had the economic impact he suggests, it would eliminate almost one-third of the USPS operating deficit. Serious leaders would make the case to the American people that this is a reasonable tradeoff toward the larger goal of making the USPS viable in the long term. But we don't have serious leaders, so that is almost certainly not what they will do.


View Comments

Dan Calabrese -- Bio and Archives

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.


Sponsored