[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16623-16626]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             POSTAL SERVICE

  Mr. TESTER. I wish to address the challenges we have at the Postal 
Service today.
  There is an old saying that when you are in a hole, stop digging. 
Don't make things worse. Don't shoot yourself in the foot. It is 
actually quite simple advice that all of us need to follow.
  Here in Congress we could apply it to a lot of different issues. Our 
budget and the immigration system come to mind. But that hole grows 
faster when two parties are digging. When you have two shovels, the 
walls become higher, the climb out becomes more difficult, and that is 
what is happening right now with the Postal Service.
  On one side we have the Postmaster General and Postal Service 
leadership actively cutting services and mail delivery standards. They 
think they can cut their way to fiscal solvency, and quite frankly in 
this case they are wrong. The answer is not more cuts. In fact, if it 
wasn't for the prefunding requirement for retiree health benefits, the 
Postal Service would have made nearly $1 billion in 2012.
  Clearly, the Postal Service doesn't need to keep shutting down 
facilities and slowing down delivery. What the Postal Service does need 
is responsible reform legislation, and that is why I am here this 
afternoon.
  All the Postal Service is doing with its shortsighted cuts is 
weakening trust in the Postal Service. Essentially, Postal Service 
leadership is cutting the legs out from underneath themselves. They are 
digging the hole deeper.
  But Congress is in the hole with the Postmaster General. There are a 
lot of folks in Congress who would love to see the Postal Service go 
out of business, but the Postal Service, whether in urban America or 
rural America, delivers the goods America needs. It delivers medicine, 
newspapers, equipment, letters, and even election ballots. It is a 
critical part of our daily lives. But the Postal Service is preparing 
to end overnight delivery in all but a few American cities and close 82 
mail processing facilities starting in January. These facilities route 
mail from New York to California, from Seattle to Sarasota, from a 
grandmother to her grandson.
  When these facilities close or consolidate, it costs thousands of 
jobs, and more importantly it means mail goes to the remaining 
facilities and it means packages have to travel longer to get to where 
they are going. When that happens, more folks will not get the mail 
when they need it. It means more delayed credit card payments. It means 
more needed medicine sitting in a truck for another day. Come next 
election it might even mean lost ballots.
  The Postal Service has already stopped overnight delivery in large 
parts of rural America. Even 2-day delivery is now hard to come by. If 
the Postal Service implements its new plan in January, that will be the 
case almost nationwide.
  Congress has the power to stop these closures, and it would make 
sense to keep these facilities open while we work to reform the Postal 
Service in a way that treats its employees and its customers and the 
general public fairly. But in the Senate, and in the House, too many 
folks have their shovels out. So far the proposals coming out of this 
Congress fall far short of what is needed to put the Postal Service on 
sound financial footing.
  We are here today to urge the House of Representatives and this body, 
the Senate, to include a provision in the government funding bill that 
will keep the processing facilities open. There is no point in closing 
mail processing facilities while Congress works on a comprehensive 
postal reform bill. I know we have trouble passing responsible 
legislation around here, I get that, but there is painstaking--and I do 
mean painstaking--work going on around here to pass a Postal Service 
reform bill.
  The bill that passed the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee 
earlier this year needs work--serious work. It does not preserve strong 
rural mail standards. It is opposed by folks in rural America, by 
postal unions, and by mailers. Under the bill--except in the big 
cities--we can kiss 1-day delivery goodbye. With the cuts it proposes, 
the bill fundamentally prevents the Postal Service from performing its

[[Page 16624]]

constitutional duty of keeping this Nation stitched together.
  But along with other members of the committee, and some like-minded 
folks in the House, we are trying to find a way forward. We are trying 
to reform the Postal Service without putting the burden on rural 
America. A proposal I am working on will give the Postal Service the 
flexibility to raise new revenue while reducing the costly mandate to 
prefund retirement benefits. That requirement is swamping the agency's 
books.
  Other Members of Congress are pushing to allow the Postal Service to 
continue its crusade against rural America. My effort, on the other 
hand, is a balanced solution that preserves strong rural mail standards 
while putting the Postal Service on the path to fiscal solvency.
  We have been here long enough to know that there is no magic bullet. 
Congress is full of too many interests and too many constituencies, but 
the least we can do is to stop making things worse. There is no reason 
to keep digging the hole. We have evidence behind our case.
  The GAO, in its analysis of past closures of the processing 
facilities, said the Postal Service is already unable to meet its 
reduced service standards--already unable to meet the standards that 
have already been reduced.
  The Congressional Budget Office--looking at potential savings from 
facility closures--didn't take into account the loss of mail volume 
resulting from reducing the quality of service.
  There are simply way, way, way too many unanswered questions about 
how these closures would affect mail service, and that is why a 
bipartisan majority of Senators, including myself, have called to stave 
off the closures of these processing facilities. Over 160 House Members 
have done the same.
  A moratorium on mail processing facilities is the way to go. It will 
stop the bleeding and stop the digging that Congress and the Postal 
Service are doing right now. It will send a signal that the American 
people's representatives will not sit by as opponents work to privatize 
the Postal Service.
  This is the busiest season of the year for the Postal Service. Folks 
send presents and cards through the mail. We hear from old friends and 
families whom we have not heard from in a long time. It is a busy and 
important time but no more critical than any other time of the Postal 
Service's year. Mail processing facilities don't just get used for 
mailing Christmas cards and presents, nor do the post offices. Reduced 
post office hours will affect Americans' lives as well.
  Westby, MT, is in the far northeastern corner of Montana. It is along 
the border with North Dakota. It is a beautiful little town. The Westby 
Post Office is where Ken Keldsen, a veteran in his ninth decade, goes 
to pick up his prescription medicine. The mail takes a little longer to 
get to Westby these days because the processing plant was closed last 
year, and the post office is open for a few less hours each day.
  Ken wrote my office and told me the reduced hours make it harder for 
him--this veteran in northeastern Montana in his nineties--to get his 
medication.
  Here is what it comes down to: We need a reform bill that keeps the 
Postal Service financially viable while maintaining strong mail service 
standards for people such as Ken. It is not an easy proposition. We 
have been working on it for quite a while now. But the calls and need 
for reform are stronger than ever. There is no reason to keep digging. 
There is still time for Congress to stop the mail processing facility 
closures scheduled to start in January. That will give us more time to 
pass good legislation that sets the Postal Service straight.
  I urge my colleagues in this body to do just that because this 
country needs a viable Postal Service, one that the American people can 
trust.
  It is more than just holiday cards and packages. It is about making 
sure payments arrive on time. It is about making sure lease agreements 
get to the proper people, but it is not just about these things. It is 
also about having faith as a nation that we as a body--as a Senate, as 
a House, as a Congress--can make responsible decisions to preserve what 
is important in this country.
  There has been a lot of talk about working together and getting 
things done since the election. I wish it could have happened before 
the election, but we are where we are. We have a great opportunity to 
work together to keep the Postal Service solvent and keep those 
standards high for not only urban America but for rural America also. 
We need to do that today. This is an important effort.
  With that, I would love to hear from the Senator from Vermont, Mr. 
Sanders.
  Mr. SANDERS. Madam President, let me begin by thanking Senator Tester 
not only for being on the floor today but for working on the issue of 
making sure that in 50 States in this country--in rural America and in 
urban America--we continue to have a Postal Service of which the 
American people are proud. I wish to acknowledge Senator Baldwin, who 
is presiding, for her strong work on this issue, as well.
  I represent one of the most rural States in America. I don't know if 
it is more rural than Montana, but it is very rural. Most of our people 
live in very small towns. The local post office is not just the place 
to pick up mail or to mail letters. It is a symbol of what the town is 
about. It is an institution that identifies the town. It is where 
people come together. It is a very important part of rural America.
  We have been battling on this issue now for a number of years. As 
Senator Tester will remember, it wasn't so many years ago when the 
Postmaster General came up with a proposal that would have led to the 
shutting down of 15,000 mostly rural post offices all over America. To 
my mind, that was a disastrous proposal. Many of us stood up and fought 
back and worked something out. While the compromise was not all that I 
wanted, at least it prevented the shutdown of 15,000 post offices all 
over this country.
  Right now--and I think Senator Tester made this point--the Postal 
Service has announced that beginning next month, it will be shutting 
down up to 82 mail processing plants. Those are the plants that move 
the mail along into areas all over the country. They also want to 
abolish overnight delivery standards and first-class mail. In the 
process, at a time when we need to create decent-paying jobs, this 
proposal would eliminate up to 15,000 good-paying, middle-class jobs at 
the Postal Service.
  The reason Senator Tester and I and hopefully others have come to the 
floor today is to send a very loud and clear message to the Postmaster 
General, to our colleagues here in the Senate, to our colleagues in the 
House, and to the President of the United States. The message is that 
at a time when the middle class is disappearing and the number of 
Americans living in poverty is almost at an alltime high, do not 
destroy decent-paying jobs at the Postal Service. At a time when the 
Postal Service is competing with the instantaneous communication of 
emails and of high speed Internet, do not slow down mail delivery 
service, but speed it up. Do not dismantle the Postal Service by 
shutting down up to a quarter of the mail processing plants that are 
left in this country.
  On August 14, I was delighted to work with Senator Tester and others 
on a letter to the Appropriations Committee, urging them to include 
language in the omnibus appropriations bill or the continuing 
resolution to prevent the Postal Service from making these devastating 
cuts and protecting these 15,000 jobs and these 82 processing plants. I 
am happy to say that a majority of the Members of the Senate--51 of 
them, including Majority Leader Reid, Senator Durbin, Senator Schumer, 
and six Republicans--Senator Hatch, Senator Inhofe, Senator Hoeven, 
Senator Blunt, Senator Thune, and Senator Collins--all signed on to 
this letter. They understand--many of them coming from rural areas--
that this is not a Republican issue or a Democratic issue; this is an 
issue to protect mail delivery all over this country and especially in 
rural areas.
  Shortly after we sent our letter, 160 Members of the House signed on 
to a similar letter calling for a 1-year moratorium to stop these mail 
processing

[[Page 16625]]

plants from closing, and 23 Republicans signed that letter as well. So 
we are seeing bipartisan support in the House and in the Senate saying 
loudly and clearly: Do not shut down 82 processing plants; do not slow 
down mail delivery service; do not eliminate 15,000 decent-paying jobs.
  I know Senator Mikulski, the chair of the Appropriations Committee, 
wants to see this happen, but to make it happen, she needs Republican 
support. I very much urge my Republican colleagues to stand up for 
rural America, stand up for 15,000 jobs. Let's protect these 82 
processing plants.
  As Senator Tester has made clear, the beauty of the Postal Service is 
that it provides universal service 6 days a week to every corner of 
America--no matter how small or how remote. It supports millions of 
jobs in virtually every other sector of our economy. It provides 
decent-paying union jobs to some 500,000 Americans, and, in fact--and I 
say this as the chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs--
it is the largest single employer of veterans. Whether one is a low-
income elderly woman living at the end of a dirt road in Pennsylvania 
or Vermont or a wealthy CEO on Wall Street, people get their mail 6 
days a week.
  The American people, by the way, pay for this service at a cost far, 
far less than anywhere else in the industrialized world. But if 
Congress doesn't stop the Postmaster General from making these 
devastating cuts, it will drive more Americans away from the Postal 
Service and will lead to what we call a death spiral. The quality of 
service deteriorates, fewer people use the Postal Service, less revenue 
comes in, and the process continues to deteriorate.
  Despite what some in this country have been hearing in the media, and 
despite what some in the Postal Service have been saying, the Postal 
Service is not going broke. We hear that every three months--people 
telling us the Postal Service is going broke. That is not true. The 
major reason the Postal Service is in bad financial shape today is 
because of a mandate signed into law by President George W. Bush in 
December 2006, during a lameduck session of Congress, that forces the 
Postal Service to prefund 75 years of future retiree health benefits 
over a 10-year period. This burden is unprecedented in any other 
government agency or any private sector company in the United States of 
America. It is a burden that every single year costs the Postal Service 
$5.5 billion, and that one provision--that one provision--is 
responsible for all of the financial losses posted by the Postal 
Service since October 2012--just that one provision.
  Over the past 2 years, the Postal Service has made an operating 
profit of nearly $1 billion. Let me repeat that. Over the past 2 years, 
the Postal Service has made an operating profit of nearly $1 billion, 
excluding this prefunding mandate that must be gotten rid of. Further, 
before this prefunding mandate was signed into law, the Postal Service 
was also profitable. In fact, from 2003 to 2006, the Postal Service 
made a combined profit of more than $9 billion. So when we hear that 
the Postal Service is in financial difficulty, the key reason--the 
overwhelming reason--is this onerous, unprecedented burden of coming up 
with $5.5 billion every year to pay for future health retirees.
  Given the improved financial condition of the Postal Service, it 
makes no sense to me to close down mail plants, destroy jobs, and slow 
mail delivery. Our job right now is to make the Postal Service an 
agency that functions efficiently in the 21st century. We have to give 
them the tools to effectively compete. But the way we do that is not by 
cutting, cutting, and cutting. That is a path toward disaster.
  So I hope the Members of the Senate and the Members of the House of 
Representatives will stand together and prevent these 82 processing 
plants from shutting down and come up with some legislation which 
expands the capability of the Postal Service to compete and protects 
the American people who want high quality Postal Service.
  With that, I yield the floor to the Senator from Wisconsin, Ms. 
Baldwin.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tester). The Senator from Wisconsin.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I am delighted to join the senior Senator 
from Montana and the Senator from Vermont on this important topic.
  The issue of postal processing facility closures greatly impacts my 
State of Wisconsin, and it greatly impact States across the country, I 
must say.
  Since 2012 the Postal Service has closed or consolidated 141 
processing facilities throughout the United States. In June the 
Postmaster General announced plans to consolidate up to 82 mail 
processing facilities, and eliminate 15,000 jobs in 2015. Four of these 
facilities are in the State of Wisconsin: Eau Claire, La Crosse, 
Madison, and Rothschild in the Wausau region of the State of Wisconsin.
  When postal processing facilities close, that impacts service 
standards, which really boils down to the time it takes for a piece of 
mail to get from point A to point B. At this moment, I can't tell my 
constituents, my Wisconsinites, how long these delays will be because 
the Postal Service has yet to study this impact. These closures are set 
to begin within a month. So for small businesses who rely on the Postal 
Service to get their goods to market and for seniors such as the 
veteran who was described earlier by the senior Senator from Montana 
who gets his medicine through the mail, there is really no way for them 
to know at this moment how these closures are going to affect them, and 
sometimes what is in the mail is a lifeline for them.
  In fact, the inspector general found the Postal Service failed to 
follow its own rules, which require the Postal Service to study the 
impacts these consolidations will have on their service standards--
again, the time it takes for a piece of mail to get from point A to 
point B. They are also supposed to inform the public of these impacts 
and, additionally, to allow affected communities to provide input 
before a final decision is made. However, this simply didn't happen. 
That is why I was proud to join Senator McCaskill in a bipartisan 
letter to the Postmaster General requesting that the Postal Service 
delay these proposed closures and consolidations until they have a 
fair, complete, and transparent process in place.
  The Postal Service exists to serve all Americans, and my constituents 
and the consumers who fund the Postal Service deserve to have their 
voices heard in this process. They are stakeholders in this process. 
While there are certainly process and transparency problems with these 
closures, another issue that concerns me is the fact that these 
shortsighted cuts are harming the very thing that makes the Postal 
Service unique. The major strength of the U.S. Postal Service is its 
significant network which can reach every community in America. Whether 
one is in an urban city such as Milwaukee, WI, or in a rural town such 
as Prentice, the Postal Service reaches these Wisconsin communities. 
But by continually chipping away at the substantial service network, 
the Postal Service is developing into an urban package delivery system 
at the expense of rural Americans and rural Wisconsinites.
  Proponents of this idea of closures and consolidations say it is 
counterproductive to delay these closures because they should happen as 
soon as possible. They say Congress has failed to act and that the 
Postal Service has been left with no alternative but to close more 
processing facilities.
  I agree on one point; that is, that Congress has, indeed, failed to 
act. We must. Congress has failed to act. I do not know how many have 
sort of heard this in relation to bills to try to fix problems. Have 
you ever seen someone present an idea and they say, look, everybody who 
is a stakeholder hates this so it must be a good bill?
  Well, I kind of disagree with that proposition, that it has to be 
that way. I can tell you there is another way forward. That path 
involves working with, not against, Postal Service employees and 
customers. It relieves the Postal Service of congressionally mandated 
overpayments. It maintains service standards for all communities. It 
provides Postal Service customers with certainty on postal rates.

[[Page 16626]]

  I am going to continue to fight on this issue. I am delighted and 
proud to be joining my colleagues here today on the floor to raise this 
immediate issue of postal process facility closures, this pending 
issue, but also to renew our commitment to the longer range, broader 
postal reform that gives our constituents, whether rural, suburban, or 
urban, the confidence and service they deserve.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NELSON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Hirono). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________