[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 103 (Tuesday, July 26, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H6472-H6477]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1445
   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 22, POSTAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND 
                            ENHANCEMENT ACT

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 380 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 380

       Resolved,  That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 22) to reform the postal laws of the United 
     States. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
     with. All points of order against consideration of the bill 
     are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 
     shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by 
     the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Government Reform. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-

[[Page H6473]]

     minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original 
     bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule 
     the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
     the Committee on Government Reform now printed in the bill. 
     The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall 
     be considered as read. All points of order against the 
     committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. 
     Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to the 
     committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in 
     order except those printed in the report of the Committee on 
     Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may 
     be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
     offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
     considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified 
     in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent 
     and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall 
     not be subject to a demand for division of the question in 
     the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of 
     order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion 
     of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee 
     shall rise and report the bill to the House with such 
     amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a 
     separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the 
     Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 
     amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Forbes). The gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  This structured rule provides 1 hour of general debate, equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Government Reform, and waives all points of order 
against consideration of the bill. It provides that the amendment in 
the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Government 
Reform now printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill 
for the purpose of amendment and waives all points of order against the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
Government Reform.
  The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the 
Committee on Rules report accompanying the resolution and provides that 
these amendments may be offered only in the order printed in the 
report, only by a Member designated in the report, and shall be 
considered as read. They shall be debatable for the time specified in 
the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the 
Committee of the Whole.
  Finally, the rule waives all points of order against the amendments 
printed in the report and provides one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 22, the Postal 
Accountability and Enhancement Act, and this underlying rule. When I 
was first elected to Congress in 1996, I served on the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight's Postal Service Subcommittee, which 
was charged with the task of reforming our Nation's postal operations 
to make them more efficient, cost-effective, and responsive. And 
although I no longer serve on the committee or the subcommittee charged 
with the oversight of the U.S. Postal Service, my commitment to 
reforming the Postal Service has not decreased.
  Today, for the first time in three decades, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), chairman of Committee on Government Reform; 
and the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), my friend, have brought 
to the House floor a comprehensive bill that would vastly improve the 
United States Postal Service, and I would like to thank both of them 
for all the hard work that the Committee on Government Reform has 
invested in this legislation.
  Since President Nixon signed the Postal Reorganization Act in 1970, 
the United States Postal Service has not significantly updated its 
fundamental operations. While this legislation helped to update the 
Postal Service and to move it from a bureaucracy subsidized by tax 
revenue to self-sufficiency, a market-based entity, the way that people 
communicate has changed dramatically over the last three decades, and 
the Postal Service must now evolve to meet the changing demands of 
consumers.
  The Postal Service is a very large organization that sits at the 
center of a $900 billion industry, representing about 9 percent of 
America's GDP, that employs more than 9 million workers nationwide. It 
processes more than 200 billion pieces of mail to 130 million 
households and businesses every year, and it directly employs 700,000 
people, making it the second largest employer in the country. If the 
Postal Service were a private company, it would rank 11th on the 
Fortune 500 in terms of revenue.
  However, 21st century realities, including decreasing volume; 
insufficient revenue; mounting debts; and the rapid growth of 
electronic communications for advertising, bill payments, and 
information transfer present an enormous challenge to the Postal 
Service in fulfilling its mission to ``provide postal services that 
bind the Nation together through the correspondence of the people, to 
provide access in all communities, and to offer prompt, reliable postal 
services at uniform prices.''
  H.R. 22 maps out a responsible and accountable future for the United 
States Postal Service that will provide increased oversight for its 
operations, renew its focus on its core mission of delivering the mail, 
and save as many as 1.5 million jobs in the private sector that rely on 
the Postal, and accomplishing all of this without imposing a 
significant new tax burden on every American who uses stamps.
  This bill would transform today's Postal Rate Commission into the 
Postal Regulatory Commission and give it to the authority to ensure 
that the Postal Service as an efficient and responsible operation in 
the 21st Century environment exists. It would require the Postal 
Service to account for all of its costs in SCC-like financial 
disclosure statements and give the Regulatory Commission the authority 
to punish the Postal Service for any noncompliance. It would also 
subject the Postal Service to antitrust laws, require the Regulatory 
Commission to account for the advantages that its government status 
confers, and build these advantages into a competitive product that 
helps to raise the level playing field with private business.
  H.R. 22 would renew the Postal Service's focus on its core mission 
also of collecting, sorting, transporting, and delivering the mail more 
efficiently, and to bar it from new nonpostal products and services 
already being provided efficiently by the private sector. It would also 
prevent a 2-cent postage rate increase this year with another even 
larger increase that might have been anticipated next year that would 
act as a significant drain and back-door tax on our growing economy.
  According to estimates, if mail decreased by 10 percent, over 780,000 
mailing industry jobs would also be at risk; and if decreased by 20 
percent, over 1.5 million jobs would also be at risk.
  As our economy continues to expand with 25 consecutive months of job 
gains adding over 3.7 million new jobs to payrolls, and payroll 
employment having increased by 2.1 over the year, we should not be 
adding artificial impediments to future job growth and expansion like a 
stamp price increase. Adding this new stealth tax on American families 
and businesses would simply accelerate the movement of mailers to other 
communications media, decreasing volumes at the Postal Service even 
further and exposing taxpayers to the unfunded obligations of the 
United States Postal Service.
  I am very proud of the hard work that so many Members have put into 
reforming the United States Postal Service to ensure that it is a 
dynamic, market-based entity that provides uniform and universal 
service to America while preventing its status as a government entity 
from subsidizing its competition for providing goods and services 
already being supplied by the private sector.
  I would personally like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
McHugh) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), our wonderful 
chairman, for their tireless efforts to

[[Page H6474]]

improve the United States Postal Office.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Sessions) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I 
yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today with disappointment that the House is again 
considering a rule that blocks all but a select few from offering 
amendments. Let me make it clear I do not oppose the underlying bill, 
and I intend to vote for it, but the closed manner by which the 
majority is bringing the underlying bill to the floor is just plain 
wrong.
  Yesterday in the Committee on Rules, the gentleman from Tennessee 
(Mr. Ford) offered an amendment that would permit military personnel on 
Active Duty in the Department of Defense-designated combat zones to 
receive packages on a postage-free basis. Under this rule, however, the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford) is not permitted to offer his 
amendment. I am disappointed and displeased that the majority has once 
again failed to provide the House with an opportunity to extend the 
most meager of benefits to those men and women who risk their lives so 
that all of us can be free. We really should be ashamed of ourselves.
  As the gentleman from Texas has noted, Mr. Speaker, the Postal 
Accountability and Enhancement Act represents the first major 
restructuring of the United States Postal Service in over 30 years. 
This bill provides the Postal Service with greater flexibility to set 
its rates and manage its costs. It also creates a new regulatory system 
for overseeing the Postal Service's operations and levels the playing 
field for the Postal Service to finally compete against the 
megacommercial delivery services of the world.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation is long overdue. On July 26, 1775, 
Benjamin Franklin was named our country's first Postmaster General. It 
took the Continental Congress just 1 day to name Benjamin Franklin to 
that prestigious post. As many of my colleagues and students of 
American history are well aware, the Congress of 1775 had many great 
issues to deal with at that particular time, such as the Revolutionary 
War, disputes over taxes, and the issue of private landownership, just 
to name a few. Yet with all the great events that were taking place at 
the time, the Continental Congress still managed to name a Postmaster 
General in just 1 day. Ironically, it took President Bush 5 years to 
finally support the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act.

                              {time}  1500

  Benjamin Franklin once said: ``You may delay, but time will not.''
  Mr. Speaker, I applaud my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for 
refusing to delay this bill any further and for demonstrating the 
intuition to present such a sensible and necessary piece of 
legislation. The success of the legislative process by which the 
underlying bill comes to the floor today should serve as an example of 
what Congress can accomplish when bipartisanship and openness overwhelm 
political partisanship.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the underlying 
legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) has made some very good 
points, and that is that the work that has gone into this bill, while 
it has been some probably 10 years in the making, was done through 
strong leadership, it was done through strong bipartisan leadership, it 
was done not only with the negotiation of the United States Postal 
Service, its management and its unions, but also so many outside groups 
that had an influence in impacting a bill that was done properly.
  A lot of that credit goes to the chairman of the Committee on 
Government Reform, who a long time ago decided that it was in the best 
interest of the economy of this country to make sure that a carefully 
crafted bill, a bipartisan bill that could be supported on this floor 
by members like the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), who had served on the postal 
committee many years ago with me, would be able to bring forth to this 
floor a good answer. I am very proud to support this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Tom Davis).
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, an alumnus 
of the Committee on Government Reform, a very active former committee 
member, for yielding me this time.
  I rise today in support of House Resolution 380, the rule to provide 
for the consideration of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act.
  ``Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these 
couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.'' This is 
the unofficial motto of the Postal Service, engraved outside the James 
A. Farley Post Office in New York City.
  But today, the Postal Service faces a threat far greater than snow or 
rain or heat or gloom of night. The threat is the outdated and 
unsustainable structural framework within which the Postal Service 
operates. It threatens to bring it to the brink of catastrophe unless 
Congress acts immediately. I think that H.R. 22, the Postal 
Accountability and Enhancement Act, is the solution.
  This legislation reforms and sustains a vital sector of our overall 
economy. Standing alone, the Postal Service currently has more than 
800,000 employees. But more than 9 million American jobs, $900 billion 
in commerce, and nearly 9 percent of the Nation's gross domestic 
product depend on mail and package delivery.
  Each year the Postal Service processes and delivers 208 billion 
pieces of mail to more than 130 million addresses in the United States. 
That is 208 billion magazines, catalogs, thank-you notes, birthday 
cards, wedding invitations, Social Security checks, IRS refunds, 
letters to our Congressmen, movie rentals, all delivered in fulfillment 
of the Postal Service's promise of universal service.
  The last time that the Congress passed legislation to overhaul the 
Postal Service was 1970 when President Nixon signed the Postal 
Reorganization Act, before e-mails, before faxes. The world has 
changed.
  It is now time to bring the Postal Service into the 21st century, to 
rescue it from the structural, legal, and financial constraints that 
have brought it to the brink of utter breakdown.
  Now, our time to act is short. This past April, the Postal Service 
began the process of requesting a 5.4 percent rate hike for all 
categories of mail. These rate hikes, think of them as a tax on the 
average postal customer which, of course, is practically everybody in 
the United States, will take effect next year unless Congress acts. For 
direct marketers, financial service companies, businesses relying 
heavily on shipping and mailing, these rate hikes will be devastating.
  Some observers have likened the Postal Service's current situation to 
a death spiral, where declining business leads to higher rates which, 
in turn, leads to further declines in business until it is too late to 
change course. Unfortunately, under current law, the Postal Service's 
only recourse to remain competitive in today's markets is to raise its 
rates.
  Moreover, the Postal Service's more recent request for a rate 
increase was spurred in part by an existing requirement that the Postal 
Service contribute $3.1 billion to a Federal pension escrow account, 
even though this account now houses more than $73 billion in civil 
service retirement savings that rightfully belongs to the USPS. This is 
but one of the outdated requirements that H.R. 22 seeks to reform.
  Is this bill perfect? No, but there is no magic legislative potion 
that will cure the Postal Service of its ills. But I think that all of 
the stakeholders, the postal employees, the financial service 
companies, major marketers and, most importantly, all Americans who use 
stamps, are better off with this legislation than they would be without 
this long overdue package of reform.
  More than 35 years after the last reform of the Postal Service, with 
millions of jobs at stake, and particularly in the face of the pending 
rate increases, the time has come for Congress to act. I want to thank 
the gentleman from California (Chairman Dreier) and the Committee on 
Rules

[[Page H6475]]

for crafting this rule. I urge Members to support it. I thank my good 
friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), a former member of the 
committee, for his leadership and assistance in crafting this rule and 
getting this bill to the House floor. It was very, very important; and 
without his efforts, we probably would not be here today.
  Ben Franklin once said: ``A penny saved is a penny earned.'' Rates 
are set to go up 2 cents. If we act today, we can stave that off, we 
can delay that, we can put savings back into the post office.
  I want to also thank my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
McHugh), who has forgotten more about the Postal Service than I will 
ever know, who struggled with this for 10 years and has been very 
critical in crafting this legislation; and on the other side of the 
aisle, my ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), 
and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) who have put innumerable 
hours into crafting the bipartisan bill.
  I think this is a good rule, it is a good bill, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 4 
minutes to my friend, the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in 
permitting me to speak on this rule. I rise in support of the approach 
that has been taken. I add my praise for the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Tom Davis), for the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), for the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), for the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Waxman), for people who have labored long and hard dealing with 
the first post office update in over a third of a century. What we have 
before us is a carefully balanced effort to update and modernize this 
critical service.
  I became involved with this effort when I first came to Congress 10 
years ago, dealing with one specific element of focus, and that is to 
make sure that the post office, the local post office, which is the 
cornerstone of a livable community in small neighborhoods, in small-
town America, in downtowns, that those 38,000 postal facilities in 
every way were assets to the community.
  Sadly, what we found was a litany of efforts in the past where the 
post office basically did not play by the rules. It was idiosyncratic. 
Local land-use decisions were turned into political footballs. We had a 
series of efforts where the post office unfortunately ignored 
environmental regulations, local needs and desires. We set about to fix 
that with legislation that basically would have required the post 
office to play by the same rules as the rest of America.
  I will say over the course of the 10 years, working with some of the 
colleagues that I mentioned, working with the Board of Governors of the 
Postal Service, working with three Postmasters General and others who 
are active in this effort, that we have come a long way. In fact, in 
many areas of the United States, we have seen examples where the post 
office has taken seriously its responsibilities and has been a model 
player providing that essential cornerstone.
  It is important that this not be idiosyncratic. It is important that 
this approach, this way of doing business, must be codified into law so 
everybody can be protected. One of the reasons I support H.R. 22 is 
because it does just that. It requires the post office to obey zoning, 
planning, environmental regulations. It will be better for the post 
office; it is better for our communities.
  But I want to go a little beyond that, because as I have been 
involved, I have been struck with the importance, not just in bringing 
up the physical facilities of 38,000 postal offices around the country, 
but to be active in terms of the change that is taking place.
  The United States Postal Service occasionally comes into criticism by 
people who are concerned about it, but the fact is the post office 
handles one-half of the mail in the entire world. They collect only 
one-quarter of the revenue; they have less than a fifth of the work 
force; they are more than three times as productive as postal services 
around the world, and their rates are lower than any other of the 
developed countries. It is also important that we are ready for the 
changes that are cascading down upon the Postal Service. The status quo 
is not tenable. This legislation recognizes that.
  I strongly urge, however, that as we come forward with a range of 
amendments that they be rejected. I appreciate that they are well-
intended. Some of them in other contexts I may be interested in, but 
this is part of this carefully crafted balance. It is important that we 
not upset the apple cart. It does not take much to derail it. It has 
been a hard pull to get to this point. I strongly urge that we support 
making the post office a full partner, that we resist amendments that 
would upset the balance, and that we can all be, after the approval of 
H.R. 22, the modernization, so that we can be about the business that 
is going to have to go on from here. Because there is more work that is 
going to be done. Controversy is not going to go away. Luckily, this 
legislation provides a platform that is going to help us all do this 
important work.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  A lot of the leadership that has been talked about, making sure that 
this bill is a carefully crafted bill, is true. But there are also a 
lot of people who played a big role in making sure that the elements 
and the people who are a part of the dialogue and a part of the things 
that were necessary to make sure this balanced bill was brought forward 
were important also.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller), the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs for the Committee on 
Government Reform, has played an integral role in making sure that not 
only her footprint was on this and hand print was on this but, also, in 
particular, that other people who had a vested interest, most of all 
the taxpayers of this country, were also involved.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. 
Miller).
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this rule, and I am very proud to be a 
cosponsor of this legislation. I did serve on the postal panel and the 
Committee on Government Reform as well. This is really the first real 
reform of the United States Postal Service since the 1970s.
  Mr. Speaker, America succeeds and America prospers because America 
evolves. Our Nation evolves. We are always striving to leverage our 
economic, our technological, and our political advancements to improve 
our entire Nation. Much of what might have been good in the 1970s is 
clearly not good enough for the 21st century, especially when it comes 
to communications; and the United States Postal Service, with a 
uniquely critical means of communicating in our Nation, unfortunately, 
is laboring under a business model that was built in an era that 
predates the Internet, that predates e-mail, and even fax machines.
  Any private sector business would have been put out of business. But 
the United States Postal Service today, and these are some staggering 
numbers, actually delivers 200 billion pieces of mail each and every 
year, it delivers to 130 million households, and it is the center of a 
nearly $1 trillion industry.
  But the competition is growing, of course. Revenues are at risk; its 
workforce, unfortunately, is aging, and so is its equipment. Yet these 
are all the same kinds of challenges that so many businesses today 
face.
  I was very proud to cosponsor and to update and to upgrade this 
legislation, which does all of that, for our Postal Service. The Postal 
Accountability and Enhancement Act modernizes the Postal Service's 
infrastructure and its financial framework; and at the same time, it 
also maintains its traditional benefit, the best benefit I think, and 
that, of course, is 6-day, universal service.

                              {time}  1515

  H.R. 22 provides the postal office with firmer financial ground, and 
it mitigates the needs to constantly raise postal rates. It ensures 
those that live in America's rural communities that they still have 
very close access to a full-service postal center. What is more, 
equally as important, I think, is it preserves the right for collective 
bargaining for our postal workers.

[[Page H6476]]

  Our postal employees have a record of achievement of on-time delivery 
performance, and many of us, I think, were reminded of how much we take 
them for granted after the anthrax scare. In fact, I remember it was a 
commercial that was playing that was put out by the Postal Service that 
had that Carly Simon song in the background, Let the River Run, and it 
really, I think, was a very powerful ad that reminded us all of how 
important our postal employees are.
  The men and women of the United States Postal Service stood then and 
they stand now in harm's way sometimes, because they have dedicated 
themselves to serving all of us. They certainly deserve the right to 
bargain collectively to protect the financial future of their families.
  This bill also serves as the framework that will help the United 
States Postal Service to become a model, quite frankly, as a 
governmental agency to be both cost-effective and cost-efficient, to 
help them to create a business plan, to negotiate the best business 
practices with its customers, and it allows for them to focus on a 
term, customer service, that is not exclusively a concept that is 
exclusively in the private domain, it can also be in the public domain 
as well.
  This bill embraces concepts like work sharing, in which the Postal 
Service embarks in a partnership with private companies offering 
postage discounts to businesses who help the Postal Service prepare and 
move our mail, flexibility that the private sector enjoys and that they 
employee as part of its competitive business mix.
  This bill essentially allows the United States Postal Service to 
operate like a business, which will clearly benefit all Americans. So I 
do want to thank everybody who worked so very hard on this piece of 
legislation. It is a very important piece of legislation. I want to 
personally recognize the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Davis), who 
just made some remarks earlier. I have watched him work tirelessly on 
this bill, as well as the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), who has 
been a leader in postal reform for a very long time.
  Mr. Speaker, I think this is a great piece of legislation which also 
demonstrates very clearly how bipartisanship can work very well on the 
floor of this House. It certainly has done that. I commend all of the 
Democratic Members who have worked very hard on this as well, and I 
would urge my colleagues to support this rule and urge them to support 
this critical piece of legislation as well.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), my good friend. A lot has been 
made of those who crafted this legislation. The gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Davis) was extremely instrumental in providing that bipartisan 
flavor to bring us to this moment.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for yielding me this time. I also want to 
thank him and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) for the 
presentation of this rule.
  I want to commend the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, 
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), and the ranking member, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), for the tremendous leadership 
that they have displayed in shaping this bipartisan legislation.
  I also want to commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), who 
is known as ``Postal Reform'' in our committee, because he has worked 
on this issue for such a long period of time.
  Many of us recognize that postal issues are not considered to be the 
most exotic business that will come before this House, but if you are 
waiting for an important document that does not come at the time you 
were hoping to receive it, or maybe it was a letter from a relative, 
from your mother or your father or from your child, and it is not 
there, or it was an admissions letter to college or university and you 
are anticipating its arrival, and it does not come, then you begin to 
realize how important the Postal Service is.
  I want to commend the thousands of men and women who work every day 
to make sure that these channels of communication are still open. 
Imagine being able to get a letter from anyplace, first class, in the 
United States of America for 37 cents. That is no easy feat.
  And so I commend all of those who have made sure that these channels 
of communication have been kept open. I commend all of those members of 
the committee who have labored, and all of the stakeholders. Shaping 
this legislation was not the easiest thing in the world to do, but I 
have been told that when men and women of goodwill come together with a 
basic recognition of the need to be in sync, that you can work out 
solutions to any problems that have existed.
  That is what has taken place in the Committee on Government Reform. 
Again, I commend the tremendous leadership that we have gotten from the 
chairman and ranking member. I know that there are amendments that are 
desirable, but I am going to resist them, and urge that they be 
resisted, and urge passage of this landmark legislation that seeks to 
reform the postal system and postal operations.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions) for yielding me time.
  Let me stand today and thank those who have put together this postal 
reform bill. It is not an issue that I work on. I deal with Education 
and Workforce issues. But I have watched this issue over the last 10 
years be hit from one side of the ballpark to the other, kicked from 
one end of the field to the other, and yet we never could quite get it 
over the line.
  Mr. Speaker, I really want to stand today and thank the gentleman 
(Chairman Davis), the ranking member, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Waxman), the other members of the committee who were involved in 
this, for bringing together all of these different moving pieces in 
order to create a successful legislative package.
  The real reason I rise is to thank our colleague and my friend, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), for over 10 years has put in 
time, effort, blood, tears, to try to hold these pieces together, bring 
the necessary agreements to bring other parties together, and I think 
that he has done a fabulous job and deserves a lot of recognition from 
all of the Members for bringing this package along, staying with it. He 
could have walked away countless times because it was too hard, it was 
too difficult, and too many people just never wanted to come to the 
table, but because of his efforts and the efforts of many others, we 
are here today with a bipartisan package that deserves the support of 
all of our colleagues.
  I support the bill and certainly support the rule that will bring it 
to the floor.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time 
and for his work in bringing this bill and this rule to the floor.
  The reason that my colleagues are hearing such kudos for the 
chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), subcommittee 
chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), the ranking member, 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), and the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Davis) will be understood, I think, if you understand 
that it has taken us 11 years to get here. So only great tenacity and 
skill could have brought us this far.
  I have been in Congress for 15 years. It seems to me that this has 
been before us forever, but never on the floor before, and there is a 
good reason for it. It is not because there were special interests or 
cantankerous Members; it is we are trying to do almost the impossible. 
We are trying to make an agency meant to be only partially competitive 
stand alongside one of the most competitive parts of our economy.
  So what was necessary was to somehow bring the likes of UPS and FedEx 
on board at the same time that all of the unions could be brought with 
us, UPS and the entire industry. That is why it has taken so long and 
why in reverence we have to be thankful for those who have accomplished 
this mission. Understand we are dealing with

[[Page H6477]]

an industry that is 9 percent of our GDP, nothing to be taken lightly.
  Yet what you have before you is something of a miracle. It is a 
unanimous and bipartisan bill where Members have put aside their 
selfish concerns, and we do have them, for the greater good of the 
Postal Service, because one thing we have to come to grips with is not 
a single Member that can go home and say, well, it was not good enough 
for me, so I put your Postal Service in jeopardy. Just try that out on 
your constituents.
  At the same time, the Postal Service had to wake up to the 21st 
century, had to modernize in ways that 9/11 had nothing to do with, had 
to modernize because the world has come forward with technology that 
challenges them, the way UPS and FedEx will never challenge them. How 
do you do that?
  They are still trying to do that. But one of the things you do is 
give the Postal Service some of the flexibility that is associated with 
the private sector, as much of it as you can, consistent with the fact 
that this is a controlled section of the economy, because there are 
some things that the Postal Service must do and nobody else can do; 
that is, go to some of the far reaches of your rural districts where 
they better get their mail on time the way I do mine nine blocks from 
the Capitol.
  Even those who had serious problems with this bill, the mail 
handlers, for example, have a real problem and one that has to be taken 
seriously with the way in which the bill deals with single pieces of 
parcels, single parcels, where we have allowed the Postal Service to 
transfer revenue in order to keep this part of the service lower, and 
we are getting rid of that to make them more competitive with the 
private sector.
  They say, watch out because you are going to raise the costs, and 
that is not good. But you know what they have said and agreed to? 
Perhaps we can resolve it in conference. So they say, pass the bill. I 
say as well, because we need to modernize the Postal Service. And we 
have even gotten around for ourselves the part that says that we might 
contribute to the deficit by giving back to the Treasury what they put 
on to the Postal Service, which is the cost of military pensions.
  We say you have held billions of dollars from the Postal Service. 
Tell you one thing, if we did not do that, what it means is that the 
Postal Service, which has already filed for a rate increase, would be 
forced to go ahead. I, for one, do not want to go home in 2006 and say, 
I voted for a mail increase. That is what you will vote for if you vote 
against this bill.
  My thanks to the sponsors once again for this historic work.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, as you know, this bill is about the 
taxpayer. It is also about high-tech areas that depend upon a Postal 
Service that works properly. And our next speaker is from one of those 
areas, a high-tech area that is important to this country in not only 
manufacturing, but also delivery of goods and products.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from West Virginia 
(Mrs. Capito).
  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this rule 
and underlying postal reform legislation. I commend the gentleman from 
Virginia (Chairman Davis) and the ranking member, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Waxman), along with the much heralded sponsor of this 
bill, the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), for working in a 
bipartisan manner that has twice allowed this bill to be reported from 
committee by a unanimous vote.
  Now, I have only been here 5 years, and like my colleague from 
Washington, DC, says, she feels like every year it is painstakingly 
making its way through the process. And even in the 5 years since I 
have been here, I know how important this bill is, and I am so pleased 
that we are at the point we are today.
  I am pleased to be a cosponsor of H.R. 22 because of its importance 
to businesses, postal employees, and all of us who have mail delivered 
to our homes or our businesses. This legislation has provisions that 
will allow the Postal Service to operate more efficiently and would 
require that it focus primarily on its main focus, which is delivering 
the mail.
  H.R. 22 helps enable mailers to partner with the Postal Service to 
reduce the cost of mailings, providing an efficiency to the Postal 
Service, and helping businesses to save money that can be invested in 
jobs and job growth.
  The bill is a good idea for postal employees for a lot of different 
reasons, one of which is because it returns the responsibility for the 
military service portion of postal retiree benefits back to the 
government and corrects overpayments by the Postal Service to the Civil 
Service Retirement System.

                              {time}  1530

  In short, the bill provides the changes necessary to keep the Postal 
Service operating. It is so important to all of us every day. I mean, I 
know at certain times in my life I felt like if I did not see my 
friendly mailman or mailwoman at my door, I felt like I did not have a 
friend in the world. So let us keep the Postal Service operating 
without the hefty rate increases that would inevitably come with the 
status quo.
  This bill means a great deal to very many people. After so many years 
of work, I congratulate all of those intimately involved. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in support of the rule and the underlying bill.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we come to the close offering praise to those who 
brought us this far. I add my congratulations to the distinguished 
leadership of this committee on both sides of the aisle for fashioning 
a piece of legislation that I believe will pass the House 
overwhelmingly and that I certainly intend to support, and I ask all of 
our colleagues to do likewise.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Today, we have had an opportunity to bring forth this postal bill 
with not only bipartisanship, but really some pats on the back to a lot 
of people who have been engaged in this issue for a long time, and 
perhaps none more diligent about this than the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. McHugh), our wonderful colleague. I think the way he has gone 
about this, Mr. Speaker, has been good, not only for this House but a 
credit to the men and women who have also been engaged in this.
  I remember some 9 years ago as I went with a rural letter carrier 
down in Jeuitt, Texas, Stan Waltrip. I had a chance to go and deliver 
the mail with Stan and to see firsthand the kinds of, not only the 
people he came in contact with but the importance of doing this. So 
this bill is important that we have done this.
  There are other people who have contributed to the success, rural 
letter carriers, certainly the postal carriers, letter carriers, those 
people who represent the Post Masters, the Financial Services 
Roundtable and many others. I would also like to thank the White House 
for their involvement. Three people in particular from the Leg Affairs 
office, Brian Conklin, Elan Liang, and Chris Frech, have been very 
diligent in making sure that this House and its Members are updated 
about the position of the White House.
  Mr. Speaker, I would say this is a good piece of legislation. It is 
one that comes at a great time for this country. It is one that will 
spur the economy and make sure we are prepared for the future.
  I ask my colleagues to please make sure they support this rule and 
also the underlying legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________