The USPS Union under attack by Republican 01.09.2011

The Postal Service said, “We will be insolvent next month due to significant declines in mail volume and retiree health benefit pre-funding costs imposed by Congress.” During the past four years, the service lost $20 billion, including $8.5 billion in fiscal 2010. Over that period, mail volume dropped by 20 percent. The Postal Service has reduced its workforce by 212,000 positions in the past 10 years and recently announced it is considering the closing of 3,700 post offices. It also has asked Congress to allow it to deliver mail five days a week instead of six and to change a requirement that it pre-fund retiree health benefits.

The USPS said it needs to reduce its workforce by 120,000 career positions by 2015, from a total of about 563,400, on top of the 100,000 it expects by attrition. Some of the 120,000 could come through buyouts and other programs, but a significant number would probably result from layoffs if Congress allows the agency to circumvent union contracts.

There are many Republicans, including those who have sponsored legislation that labor considers anti-union, may support this plan. Some Democrats, for which organized labor is an ally, could back union opposition. But the Postal Service’s critical financial situation could make some Democrats have second thoughts. NACL President Fredric Rolando lays out the real root of the problem: "The problem lies elsewhere: the 2006 congressional mandate that the USPS pre-fund future retiree health benefits for the next 75 years, and do so within a decade, an obligation no other public agency or private firm faces. The roughly $5.5 billion annual payments since 2007 for a $21 billion total are the difference between a positive and negative ledger."

Postal Service management recently claimed: “If we were a private company, we would have already filed for bankruptcy and gone through restructuring—much like major automakers did two years ago.” NALC responded by calling this claim the "Big Lie." If the USPS were a private company, NALC argued, it wouldn't have been subjected to the pre-funding requirement and it would've been profitable, since the pre-funding requirement is responsible for 100 percent of the Service's losses in recent years. NALC suggests that the problem has an easy fix. Instead of eliminating the requirement for pre-funding future benefits, Rolando says that the Postal Service should be allowed to transfer funds from pension surpluses instead of operating funds. Ending Saturday service would create more problems that it would solve. More than 80,000 jobs would be lost and millions of Americans would face disruptions to their business and personal lives, as financial transactions are delayed, prescription drugs don't get to patients as quick as they otherwise would and other disruptions are created.

The Commission found that going to five-day service would not save as much money as Postal Service leader’s projects. Saturday delivery, which amounts to only two percent of postal costs, accounts for 17 percent of service. The suggestion that the Postal Service faces a major crisis -- similar to attacks across the country that have preceded assaults on other unions -- is an overstatement, of course.

The Postal Service hasn't used any taxpayer funding for more than twenty-five years. It pays for it's operations through the sale of it's services and products. In the past four years, operational revenues at the USPS have exceeded costs by $611 million. Customer satisfaction and delivery of the mail on time are at record highs. According to NACL President Fredric Rolando, fixing the real problem -- the pre-funding of future benefits at such an exaggerated standard -- isn't even on the table. Representatives Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Dennis Ross (R-FL) introduced a bill the reform the postal service, but it doesn't actually address the primary problem the USPS faces.

This attack on the USPS is being led by one man Rep Darrell Issa (R-CA) Rep Darrell Issa R-CA $220.40 Millions, Assets $295.40 mil, Liability $75.00 mil Change 37.7% he earned most of his money by owning automobile alarm systems being installed on automobiles. He is the second riches person in the US Congress.

Goldman Sachs & Rep Darrell Issa (R-CA)

Has Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) turned the House Oversight Committee into a bank lobbying firm with the power to subpoena and pressure government regulators? ThinkProgress has found that a Goldman Sachs vice president changed his name, then later went to work for Issa to coordinate his effort to thwart regulations that affect Goldman Sachs’ bottom line.

In July, Issa sent a letter to top government regulators demanding that they back off and provide more justification for new margin requirements for financial firms dealing in derivatives. A standard practice on Capitol Hill is to end a letter to a government agency with contact information for the congressional staffer responsible for working on the issue for the committee. In most cases, the contact staffer is the one who actually writes such letters. With this in mind, it is important to note that the Issa letter ended with contact information for Peter Haller, a staffer hired this year to work for Issa on the Oversight Committee. Issa’s demand to regulators is exactly what banks have been wishing for.

Indeed, Goldman Sachs has spent millions this year trying to slow down the implementation of the new rules. In the letter, Issa explicitly mentions that the new derivative regulations might hurt brokers “such as Goldman Sachs.”Haller, as he is now known, went by the name Peter Simonyi until three years ago. Simonyi adopted his mother’s maiden name Haller in 2008 shortly after leaving Goldman Sachs as a vice president of the bank’s commodity compliance group. In a few short years, Haller went from being in charge of dealing with regulators for Goldman Sachs to working for Congress in a position where he made official demands from regulators overseeing his old firm.

It’s not the first time Haller has worked the revolving door to help out Goldman Sachs. According to a report by the nonpartisan Project on Government Oversight, Haller — then known as Peter Simonyi — left the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2005 to work for Goldman Sachs, then quickly began lobbying his colleagues at the SEC on behalf of his new firm. At one point, Haller was required to issue a letter to the SEC stating that he did not violate ethics rules and the SEC agreed.

I have a problem with a system that allows one man to destroy a very good postal system that not costing the government one red dime. Here is another thing if congress got out of the way and allowed the US Postal system to develop new ways of raising revenue will also help them in their time of need. Our congressional committee system is broke and need fixing. Of course, until we have term limits limiting the number of years they are allowed to served.  The US President has a two four years term limits but the US Congress has none.

When we have the courage to correct this problem our US Congressman and Women will spend their time working on the people business not out begging for bribes so they can stay in office.  These men and women are paid very well ($175K) with tons of perks, best medical care in the world. With little or no cost to them, that why I can’t understand why most of these same people are doing everything in their power to ensure that our health care is broken. We must clean house if we do not this busted system is going to drive this republic over the cliff. The “wise nine” has fired a major shot over the bow with their ruling on campaign finance. If they choose to fire another shot at healthcare; this republic will be in deep trouble.

Some of you as you are read this you are saying what is this nut talking about? Here is something else you can put in your pipe to smoke; ALEC is out to help republicans steal the next election if they are successful and win like they did when most people stayed home and didn’t vote in 2010. If you have been paying attention to all these Republicans governors that was elected in the 2010 election that lied to the voters by saying they were going to offices to create jobs. However, that’s not what they went to work on as a result of their Koch brothers meeting prior to the election all had agreed to turn to social issues. In my mind the War on Women was formulated at this secret meeting. These governors and their legislator’s never had any intentions of working on jobs. If you have some doubts about this do a Google search and see what you find. I am sure you will be astounded by the results I sure was.

Remember this; republicans don’t want the economy to get better and they have been doing everything to get in the way of President Obama efforts to get the American's economy back on track. To my knowledge there have only been two congressional bills to create jobs. Both have been very small. More about this in a futures blogs.