Who Will Lead Postal Reform in the House?

Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA), the incoming Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has recently announced the creation of three subcommittees in the next Congress and their chairman.  They are as follows:

• National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations, Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) - This subcommittee appears to have a similar jurisdiction to the National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee.  This appointment moves Congressman Chaffetz, who was ranking member of the subcommittee handling the Postal Service, from primary responsibility for developing postal legislation

• Regulatory Affairs, Stimulus Oversight and Government Spending, Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) - This subcommittee appears to have a very broad mandate covering government regulations across both executive departments and independent regulatory agencies.  It is possible that this subcommittee could have some interest in the impact that the Postal Regulatory Commission has on the American economy.

• TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs, Chairman Patrick McHenry (R-NC) This subcommittee will likely to focus on oversight of agencies dealing with the financial services industry and other industries in which the Federal Government has or will propose to make investment and ensure that both government and private enterprises are held accountable for how they spend taxpayer dollars. To the extent that adjustments to the Postal Service retiree benefit calculations are perceived as a "bailout" this subcommittee could take charge of this issue and for that matter any legislation designed to change the business model of the Postal Service.

It is always possible that the Postal Service will continue to fall under a catch-all subcommittee as it did this year that includes the District of Columbia and the Federal Workforce.  However, with the shift of Congressman Chaffetz to national security oversight, the other two Republicans that remain in Congress are unlikely to chair a subcommittee dealing with Postal legislation.  Congressman Bill Shuster  is in line to chair the House Transportation Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials where he will likely have to deal with railroad regulatory issues) and Congressman Brian Bilbray will not even be on the Committee in the next Congress.

The Washington Post notes that that the other five returning Congressman who will be assigned to the full committee already have Committee or subcommittee chairmanships lined up.  The Post indicated that responsibility could fall upon one of the freshman who will serve on the committee who has not been given a subcommittee chairmanship elsewhere.   They are: Justin Amash(Mich.), Ann Marie Buerkle (N.Y.), Scott DesJarlais (Tenn.), Blake Farenholt (Texas), Paul Gosar (Ariz.), Trey Gowdy (S.C.), Frank Guinta (N.H.), Mike Kelly (Pa.), Raul Labrador (Idaho), James Lankford (Okla.), Dennis Ross(Fla.), Tim Walberg (Mich.), and Joe Walsh (Ill.). 

Whether Congressman Issa chooses to put the Postal Service under one of the subcommittees he has already created or in a new subcommittee chaired by a freshman member of Congress is not known at this time.  His choice could have a big impact on how the House of Representatives frames legislative changes in the next Congress.

What is the Context for 5-day Delivery?

One of the problems with the current regulatory and business model is that every action that is proposed to make the Postal Service financially viable is evaluated independently.   This allows those that object to one solution or another to oppose the solution under review and argue that something else should be done to restore the Postal Service's viability.

Right now the solution in the public eye is 5-day delivery.   The Postal Regulatory Commission has begun its review and Congress will soon follow with its own.  Each review appears to be completed independently of any other changes in the business model or regulatory framework that would be necessary to create a viable Postal Service.  

Furthermore, both the Postal Regulatory Commission and Congressional processes face the risk of becoming the equivalent of a city council budget hearing that has to determine how many hours fewer hours per week libraries or recreation centers will be open when budgets have to be cut.    When this occurs, patrons just have to learn to do with less service.  The proposal of Congressman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, to eliminate service on 12 days illustrates this "how much do we have to cut to balance the budget" mentality that legislative processes are designed to handle.

In his comments, Congressman Chaffetz provided a framework that makes sense.  "You have got to serve your customers, or somebody else will come in and do it for you."  This framework requires Congress to ask very different questions than they would as part of a budget process and it particular it forces them to look at the question of how many days the Postal Service delivers as part of a larger package of changes in the business model and regulatory framework.   


Right now Congressman Chaffetz and his colleagues in Congress should be starting hearings to ask these questions:

• Who are the Postal Service's customers today and who will they be in 2020 and beyond?
• What do customers need now and what will they need in 2020?
• How is the Postal Service's ability to meet customer needs affected by the current business model and regulatory framework?
• How do the Postal Service's business model and regulatory framework affect the competitiveness of its services with digital, mobile and other hard copy delivery alternatives?
• What is the macro-economic impact of the Postal Service's current business model and regulatory framework and how do they affect the economic recovery?

Once these questions are answered, Congress will be ready to discuss 5-day and all other possible actions with an understanding of the business implications of each proposed change and how they fit into a long-term Postal Service strategy of serving customers and U.S. postal policy centered on enhancing economic growth and employment.   Postal customers and employees cannot afford to have Congress do less.