[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 35 (Friday, March 5, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2369-S2370]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Jeffords):
  S. 556. A bill to amend title 39, United States Code, to establish 
guidelines for the relocation, closing, consolidation, or construction 
of post offices, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs.


         THE POST OFFICE AND COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP ACT OF 1999

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Post Office 
Community Partnership Act of 1999.
  There has been a great deal of debate lately on the importance of 
letting states and localities make their own decisions. Whether it is 
with highway funding, the the ``ed flex'' bill, or legislation to allow 
states more latitude in establishing rural hospitals, there is 
increasing sentiment that Washington really doesn't know better--states 
and localities should find solutions to the problems they know best. It 
is in the spirit of state and local control that I, along with Senator 
Jeffords, introduce legislation to give citizens a say in Postal 
Service decisions to open, close, relocate or consolidate post offices.
  Since its establishment over 200 years ago, with Benjamin Franklin as 
the first Postmaster General, the United States Postal Service has 
faithfully delivered the mail to generations of Americans. Across small 
town America, the post office is still the center of the community, the 
glue that holds towns like Livingston and Red Lodge, Montana together.
  Unfortunately, Americans all over have suffered as the Postal Service 
opens, closes, or moves post offices without considering the impact 
their decision will have on the community.
  Today, Senator Jeffords and I are introducing legislation to change 
that. With passage of the Post Office Community Partnership Act, 
downtown communities will have an increased say in their future. They 
will have input into Postal Service decisions that affect their 
communities, and they will be allowed the chance to offer alternatives 
to Postal Service changes. Under current law, communities have little 
say when the USPS decides to pull up stakes. Our bill would change that 
by allowing communities to work with the Postal Service in the 
decision-making process.
  With the exception of some minor changes, this is the same bill that 
we introduced last spring, the one that received 76 votes of support 
when it was attached to the Treasury Postal Appropriations bill.
  I was pleased when Senator Jeffords and I received such overwhelming 
support for our legislation in the 105th Congress.
  However, the amendment was stripped when the Senate and House 
reconciled their bills; I was very disappointed that the wishes of 
three in four senators were ignored in passing the final legislation 
through conference committee.
  That small communities across America are reeling from the effects of 
downtown post office closings is evidence enough that their voices need 
to be heard, and I am confident that this year we will pass this 
important bill. I believe that with mutual cooperation, the interests 
of communities and the Postal Service can be served. The nature--indeed 
the very name--of this legislation is participation.
  We will not give up the fight. For the sake of small communities 
everywhere,

[[Page S2370]]

I will continue to do my utmost to see that their views are heard and 
accounted for. I am confident that with this bill's passage our 
communities and this important American institution may begin a new era 
of cooperation for the good of all involved. And we can put the 
community back in the Postal Service.
  Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join Senator Jeffords and me 
in passing this important legislation.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss a bill that my 
colleague Senator Baucus and I are reintroducing titled the ``Post 
Office Community Partnership Act of 1999''.
  Aside from a few technical changes, the bill is similar to the one we 
introduced in the 105th Congress that was supported by so many of our 
colleagues in a 76-21 vote last July. Unfortunately our postal language 
was dropped from the underlying bill during conference with the House. 
However, I am hopeful that this year our bill will become law. I should 
add that this year we have coordinated our efforts with Representative 
Blumenauer of Oregon and an identical companion bill is being put 
forward in both the Senate and the House.
  Mr. President, I live in a small town in Vermont. I understand the 
importance downtowns and village centers play in the identity and 
longevity of communities. Downtowns are the social and economic hearts 
of small communities. They are where neighbors catch up on the news, 
shop, worship, and celebrate national holidays.
  Our bill will enable the residents of small villages and large towns 
to have a say when the Postal Service decides that their local post 
office will be closed, relocated, or consolidated. Local post offices 
are important tenants in any vibrant downtown. A recent article in USA 
Today cited a 1993 study that found that 80 percent of the people who 
shopped downtown planned their visit around a visit to the post office.
  There is much talk in the news today about revitalizing our downtowns 
and encouraging smart growth. I say to my colleagues, if you want to 
encourage smart growth, let's start by doing what we can do to keep 
federal facilities such as post offices in downtowns.
  Some of my colleagues may ask why this legislation is necessary. A 
story from my home state of Vermont will answer that question.
  A few years ago the general store on the green in Perkinsville, 
Vermont went bankrupt and the adjacent post office wanted to leave the 
small village center for a new building outside of town. By the time 
the community was aware of the relocation, plans were so far along--the 
new building had actually been constructed based on the promise of the 
post office as the anchor tenant--that there was no time to fully 
investigate in-town alternatives. One elderly resident wrote that in 
contrast to families now being able to walk to the post office, ``we 
certainly won't be walking along the busy Route 106 two miles or more 
to get postal services.''
  Mr. President, post office closings and relocations are occurring all 
across the country and especially in small and rural communities. My 
colleagues will quickly discover similar examples in their own states 
where the removal of the post office has harmed the economic vitality 
of the downtown area, deprived citizens without cars of access, and 
contributed to sprawl.
  Mr. President, post offices in Vermont and across the nation are 
centers of social and business interaction. In communities where post 
offices are located on village greens or in downtowns, they become 
integral to these communities' identities. I believe that this 
legislation will strengthen the federal-local ties of the Postal 
Service, help preserve our downtowns, and combat the problem of sprawl. 
I urge my colleagues to join Senator Baucus and me in support of this 
important legislation.

                          ____________________