By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Trump, citing the USPS’s $9.5 billion fiscal year loss and substantial liabilities, has expressed interest in privatization. Discussions with his commerce secretary nominee, Howard Lutnick, indicate a potential overhaul impacting hundreds of thousands of federal employees and potentially disrupting shipping and supply chains. This plan, though lacking specifics, follows previous conflicts with the agency, including attempts to shift key functions to the Treasury Department. Despite its recent financial struggles, the USPS remains a highly-regarded institution with a long history and a recent success in handling mail-in ballots.
Read the original article here
The United States Postal Service (USPS) has been a recurring target for privatization efforts, and a potential second Trump administration may reignite this controversial issue. The persistent narrative of financial losses within the USPS is often cited as justification for privatization, but a closer examination reveals a more complex reality.
The financial struggles of the USPS are not simply a matter of poor management or inherent inefficiency. A significant contributing factor is the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA), a piece of legislation that mandated the pre-funding of retiree health care costs for the next 75 years – a burden placed on no other federal agency or private corporation. This unique financial obligation significantly distorts the USPS’s financial picture, making it appear less profitable than it actually is. This accounting anomaly, not inherent operational flaws, is a major driver of the perceived financial losses.
Moreover, the very nature of the USPS as a public service needs to be considered. It’s not intended to operate as a profit-maximizing entity; it’s a vital component of the nation’s infrastructure, providing essential services to all Americans, regardless of location or profitability of individual routes. Comparing its financial performance to private corporations is fundamentally misleading. The military, for instance, also incurs significant financial losses, yet no one seriously suggests privatizing national defense. The question of profitability is therefore irrelevant when discussing a service that’s foundational to the country’s functioning.
The potential privatization of the USPS presents significant risks, especially concerning the reliable delivery of mail-in ballots. A private entity, potentially motivated by political influence or profit maximization, could easily manipulate or delay the delivery of ballots, significantly impacting election integrity. This is not a hypothetical concern; past incidents raise serious doubts about the trustworthiness of such a scenario. The potential for a privately-owned USPS to become a tool for partisan manipulation is chilling and should be a major cause for concern.
Furthermore, privatization of the USPS could lead to significantly higher costs for consumers and businesses. A for-profit entity would likely focus on profitable routes and customers, potentially neglecting rural areas and less lucrative services. The resulting increase in shipping costs could disproportionately impact small businesses and individuals in underserved communities, exacerbating existing inequalities. Rural communities, which heavily rely on the USPS for essential services, would be particularly vulnerable to the negative consequences of privatization.
The suggestion that the USPS’s financial problems are grounds for privatization ignores the underlying issues at play. Instead of addressing these problems, particularly the unrealistic financial burden imposed by the PAEA, privatization would likely worsen the situation, leading to reduced service, increased costs, and a loss of vital public infrastructure. In essence, this amounts to deliberately damaging a public service, then using the resulting dysfunction as an excuse for its dismantling.
Ultimately, the proposed privatization of the USPS is not about improving efficiency or reducing costs; it’s about transforming a crucial public service into a profit-generating enterprise, with potentially dangerous consequences for democratic processes and equitable service delivery. This would be a significant loss to the nation, further eroding public trust and accessibility to vital services. The potential for abuse and manipulation of a privatized USPS is substantial and warrants thorough and critical consideration. This is not simply a financial issue; it’s about the future of a vital national service and the integrity of democratic processes.