That the U.S. Postal Service is in financial trouble is no secret, nor is it a new phenomenon. (Has the postal service ever posted a profit–even during Benjamin Franklin’s tenure as Postmaster General?) Facing a 50 percent decline in usage since 2001, the USPS is now considering a dramatic plan to reduce expenses, which–if enacted–would close 250 mail processing centers across the U.S., eliminate approximately 35,000 jobs and save the USPS $3 billion per year. One of those facilities slated for closure is in Roanoke. Based on a report in today’s Washington Post stating that the USPS could default before the end of the week, cost-cutting measures can come none too soon.
On Monday night, the Roanoke Times reports, more than 400 Roanokers, including members of the local Postal Workers Union, turned out to voice their opposition to the proposed closure at a public hearing conducted by the USPS. No one present supported the plan.
On its face, this appears to be just another case of the public disagreeing with proposed cost-cutting measures by the federal government. We have seen this again and again at the state-level, from the furious protests in Madison prior to the approval of Gov. Scott Walker’s budget repair bill to Ohioans’ overwhelming rejection of Gov. John Kasich’s Senate Bill 5 in last week’s election. Said one speaker at Monday’s meeting in Roanoke:
“I’m 80 years old plus…[a]nd I never thought the day would come that I would have to beg someone to deliver my mail or keep my post office open.”
Everyone wants to see the government cut spending until their spending is to be cut. If the public can’t be convinced that cuts are necessary to a federal institution that has become an afterthought to most Americans in this age of instant communication and online banking and which has been struggling financially for decades, how do we as conservatives plan to sell the vastly more controversial plans to reform entitlement spending? If we can’t bear the thoughts of planning ahead to mitigate any delays in mail delivery, what happens when we ask Americans under 40 to are required to plan ahead for their own retirement?
Our movement’s best spokesmen on the issue of reigning in government spending, Gov. Chris Christie and Congressman Paul Ryan, have been moderately successful, but where are our presidential candidates on this issue? Those who don’t minimize the need for reforms seem under-prepared to make the case in a way that resonates with the independent voters who will decide the 2012 election. True reform may well come from Congress and the states, but the bully pulpit of the presidency could be instrumental in assuaging concerns and forging a pro-reform alliance among the public.
Conversely, though, the USPS’ plan leaves much to be desired, particularly in Roanoke. First of all, the post office is a tangible symbol of community; to some, closing a post office means more than a later mail-delivery date, it means their community loses its federal recognition. While this is more of a psychological phenomenon and a literal “death” of the community, it can cause smaller communities to wither away as traffic from the post office no longer passes other businesses. The USPS doesn’t appear to appreciate why this has become such an emotional issue for some Americans.
Secondly, the processing center in Roanoke currently sorts much of the mail posted in southwestern Virginia. Under the new plan, if you post a Roanoke-bound piece of mail in a Roanoke post office across the city from its intended destination, it will be trucked 99 miles to the nearest processing facility in Greensboro, North Carolina to be sorted, then trucked 99 miles back to Roanoke–on an already dangerous, congrested highway, US-220. That’s an almost 200 mile roundtrip journey for a letter whose ultimate destination could be only a few blocks away.
In the long-term, will the transportation expenses the USPS incurs trucking the mail from and to Roanoke–and southwestern Virginia’s other far-flung post offices–really be a dramatic savings? I’m not saying the plan won’t work, but it’s understandable why many southwestern Virginia residents are skeptical.
Ultimately, the USPS’ plan is instructional to those of us who understand that the federal spending status quo is unsustainable. We have to produce plans that will make sense to a public wary of reduced services and/or benefits and we have to find better ways and spokesmen to articulate these plans. Mail is one thing; entitlements are quite another. Getting it right then will be critical if we want to keep America from going the way of our friends in the Mediterranean.
