September 10, 2015
Last week Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ) announced that he would re-introduce legislation that would prohibit the Postal Service “from closing or consolidating any post office or other postal facility that is located in a ZIP code that has a high rate of population growth.”
The bill “directs the Postmaster General to determine annually whether a ZIP code has a high rate of population growth using population data available from the Bureau of the Census.”
When Congressman Grijalva first introduced this legislation back in 2012, it went nowhere. But without such a law, the Postmaster General is not likely to ask the Census Bureau for this kind of information. In fact, the Postal Service has previously expressed an unwillingness to consider census data when making decisions about closing postal facilities.
When the Postal Service was planning to close 3,700 post offices under the Retail Access Optimization Initiative (RAOI) back in 2011, a USPS witness told the Postal Regulatory Commission that economic and demographic profiles, as available through the census, would not be considered when deciding which facilities to consider for discontinuance. (PRC Advisory Opinion, p. 76)
Some of the witnesses for the RAOI Advisory Opinion did, however, look at census data, and one of them (Professor Anthony Yezer) recommended that population growth be considered when evaluating the demand for postal services in each community. (PRC Advisory Opinion, p. 79)
While considering growth rates may make business sense, it's not at all clear that this is a good idea. The losers would probably be rural areas, economically depressed regions, and communities that, for one reason or another, aren't growing rapidly. Why should these places lose their post offices? They're apt to be the places that need them the most.
Nonetheless, Grijalva's legislation raises some interesting questions about the relationship between census data and the shape of the postal system. In particular, it leads one to ask, What effect might the legislation have on closing post offices and processing plants?
Post offices and census data
In order to answer this question, it’s necessary to consider what a “high rate of population growth” might mean. This is not an official census category, so one can only speculate.
The population of the U.S. in 2000 was 282.2 million. By 2013, the population had grown to 316.5 million. That’s an increase of 12 percent. One might say, then, that a “high rate of population growth” would be something above the national rate.
How many ZIP code areas would this encompass?
The census website provides data sets that give the population in 2000 and 2013 for each of 33,300 5-digit zip code areas in the U.S. and territories. We’ve used the data to create a table showing the population in 2000 and 2013 and the rate of growth for this period for every ZIP code. You can see this table here. (Note that there have been some changes in the ZIP codes during this period, so there are a few anomalies in the table.)
Overall, about 9,500 of these ZIP code areas (29 percent of the total) have experienced a population growth of more than 12 percent. If that were the benchmark, the Grijalva legislation would prevent closures in these areas.
There are other ways, however, to look at the question of what constitutes a high rate of growth.
For example, about 13,450 of the 5-digit ZIP code areas (41 percent of the total) experienced a population decline from 2000 to 2013. About 17,500 (almost half) experienced either a decline or an increase of less than 5 percent.
If anything more than 5 percent were considered a high rate of growth, half the country’s post offices could not be closed under the Grijalva legislation.
September 4, 2015
A new book entitled How the Other Half Banks by Mehrsa Baradaran makes a great argument for why we need a postal banking system. The book explains how economic inequality in this country is caused largely by unequal credit. A significant portion of the population has been deserted by the banking system and is consequently forced to use payday lenders and check-cashing services to cover emergency expenses and pay for necessities. The best solution to the problem, argues Baradaran, is postal banking.
"The post office has branches in many low-income neighborhoods that have long been deserted by commercial banks," writes Baradaran in her NYT piece. "And people at every level of society have a certain familiarity and comfort in the post office that they do not have in more formal banking institutions."
(Order the book on Amazon and have the Postal Service deliver it.)
September 2, 2015
Despite the efforts of several elected officials in Congress and the recommendations of both the USPS Office of Inspector General and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Postal Service continues to sell off its legacy of historic post offices.
This week the Postal Service announced plans to relocate retail services out of the historic Post Office and Federal Building in downtown Clarksburg, West Virginia. The next step will be to dispose of the building.
According to an article in The Exponent Telegram, the Postal Service has told city officials that it plans to lease a smaller space for a new downtown post office, at a location yet to be determined.
As for the historic building, a USPS spokesperson told the city, “We don’t know how we’re going to dispose of the building,” but one possibility would be to turn it over to the GSA, which manages the courthouse presence in the building.
The Clarksburg Post Office and Federal Building was built in 1932. It's one of the "pivotal structures" in the Clarksburg Historic District, which is on the National Register of Historic Places.
The NRHP nomination form describes the building this way:
A three story building that is an excellent represenative example of Neo-Classical style architecture in public buildings of this period, the U.S. Post Office was constructed in 1931-32, replacing the old Federal building (now the Municipal Building) as the post office. The triplefront entrance is decorated in the art-deco style, offering a splendid contrastto the more severe classical features of the upper floors (that includes a series of seven bronze spandrels with classical motifs on each elevation). The building is capped by a red tile roof.
The public will have 30 days to comment on the Postal Service’s relocation plans after a representative has given a presentation at a Sept. 17 meeting of the City Council.
(Photo credit: Clarksburg Post Office and Federal Building)
September 1, 2015
The Postal Service is taking the Postal Regulatory Commission to court over the exigent rate increase. On August 28th, the Postal Service filed a Petition for Review of PRC Order No. 2623, Resolving Issues On Remand, in Docket R2013-11R.
This will mark the third time the Postal Service has appealed a PRC ruling on the case, going back to 2010 when the Postal Service first requested an exigent increase.
After the Court of Appeals issued its ruling on the case in June of this year, the Postal Service and the mailers filed comments with the PRC about how to interpret the decision. The main issue was how to implement the court’s determination that the PRC had been wrong not to count one year’s losses in the following year — the so-called “count once” rule — when figuring out how much the Postal Service had lost due to the Recession and how much it could recoup with the exigent surcharge.
As discussed in this previous post, the commenters provided at least eight different scenarios for determining how much additional contribution the Postal Service should be allowed to collect. While all the scenarios corrected the “count once” flaw in their own way, they also introduced other factors, resulting in widely divergent estimates for lost contribution and revenue.
The estimates for additional contribution ranged from as little as $60 million (the estimate by PostCom and a group of mailers associations) to as much as $8.66 billion (the Postal Service’s largest estimate).
In the end, the PRC decided that one of the Postal Service’s scenarios — the first scenario, with an estimate of $1.2 billion in lost contribution — was the most reasonable. Its July 29th order on the rate increase therefore granted the Postal Service an additional $1.19 billion in contribution, which means the exigent surcharge of 4.3 percent will remain in effect until next April or so.
Now the Postal Service wants the surcharge to go on even longer, and it has asked the U.S. District Court of Appeals to hear an appeal on the PRC’s order.