Does the USPS even need a board of governors?

United States Post Office Building

The U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors is supposed to have 11 members. It currently has three: one governor, the postmaster-general and the deputy postmaster-general.

By law, the board cannot discharge its duties unless it has a quorum, which requires six members be present. The board has been short of that number for more than a year, falling from six governors in November 2014 to five in December 2014 to three in November 2015 to one in December 2015.

The USPS board has important duties. By law it must: “direct and control the expenditures and review the practices and policies of the Postal Service.” For an agency with a $70 billion budget, and one that has lost $10 billion since 2007, this is a major job.

The governors appoint the top USPS executives and name the agency’s inspector-general. The board is supposed to “represent the public interest generally” and ensure the agency meets its various statutory obligations.

postal

President Barack Obama has nominated five individuals to serve on the board, including James Miller, who previously served. The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which has jurisdiction over the Postal Service, gave the thumbs-up to all five appointees last year. But the full Senate has not yet voted on the nominees.

There are reports (here and here) that Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has placed a hold on some of the nominees. Sanders has not yet fessed up publicly and the Senate sadly clings to its hidebound practice of permitting secret holds that gum up the legislative works.

The board purports to be still carrying out its duties. Shortly before it fell to five members, it created a “temporary emergency committee” comprised of its own members and delegated authority to it. In short, it renamed itself to dodge the quorum requirement, a maneuver that seems legally suspect. Regardless, there is no way Jim Bilbray, the sole remaining governor, can possibly do all the work himself.

Interestingly, the USPS’ performance over the past year —with just three governors— is not appreciably worse. Which prompts the question: does the USPS really need a board?

Recall that private corporations have boards that serve as representatives of shareholders. The Postal Service has no owners per se. It is a government corporation assigned duties by law. The federal government has created many government corporations, not all of which have boards. The St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corp., for example, is headed by an administrator appointed by the president, who reports to the secretary of the Department of Transportation. Not having a board has not harmed its ability to manage competently the well-trafficked waterway between the Port of Montreal and Lake Erie.

The Postal Service Board of Governors is not well-structured to provide competent oversight of USPS executives and the massive USPS apparatus. The agency has a half-million employees and more than 30,000 facilities. Governors are part-timers who rarely have expertise in postal operations or corporate matters. They do not have a squad of permanent professional staff who can school them on postal issues and watch the hen house while they are away. Governors’ compensation, notably, is not affected by their performance or by the USPS’ financial results.

As Congress slogs away at postal reform legislation, one hopes it will rethink the USPS board of governors. It may determine that a board is still needed, but if so, lawmakers should define its purposes, and craft the board in a way that would give its members the ability and incentive to be successful.

  • Pingback: Does the USPS Even Need a Board of Governors? – Kevin R. Kosar

  • manny

    No, the Postal Service does not need a Board of Governors.

    • http://www.kevinrkosar.com/ Kevin R. Kosar

      Thanks for reading. Yes, there’s an argument to be made in favor of a streamlined accountability chain: a single administrator appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Such was the way it was when the PMG was a cabinet member, before the Postal Reform Act of 45 years ago.

      • manny

        I agree the USPS needs accountability but I don’t believe anyone takes that job serious anymore. The current Senate wants to privatize the Postal Service. The former Board of Governors sold the Postal Service out when in 2006 they forced the Postal Service to pay $6 million a year for health benefits to be paid up for 75 yrs. – people that have not been born yet. No other government agency has to pay this ridiculous amount and the Postal Service does not take tax dollars. Something is wrong here. The Postal Service is a cash cow for the government and postal employees are losing their jobs and the ones that haven’t have not had raises in five years. No one else can or would deliver the mail to each and every citizen in the United States. In fact, the Postal Service delivers the last mile for UPS. Before the Postal Reform Act, the Postal Service had accountability.

        • http://www.kevinrkosar.com/ Kevin R. Kosar

          True—no other one company WOULD want to deliver mail to every person in America. So I think the rumors of postal privatization are bogus. The Senate’s committee for overseeing the USPS approved the nominees for the Board. But, one or more senators put holds on the nominees, which has brought things to a grinding halt. That’s the Senate for you—one elected official can wreak all sorts of havoc. Sadly, the Senator(s) who have blocked the nominees are not required to reveal their holds. That rule should be changed, and Senators should also have to provide publicly a written justification for their holds.

          • manny

            I agree with you. All the public information should be under the FOIA.

  • John

    The Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) also provides oversight. Currently, between the Governors and the five presidentially appointed Commissioners on the PRC, there is a redundant layer of oversight. A Commission with a staff of 75 should provide more than enough oversight to protect the interests of the American public. In short, ditch the Governors.

    • http://www.kevinrkosar.com/ Kevin R. Kosar

      Thanks for reading. Quite true. PRC has some statutory oversight duties. However, it has limited authorities to penalize USPS for misbehavior, and it certainly cannot hire/fire USPS leadership or force the USPS to set particular budget or strategic priorities. The whole governance structure needs a rethink. Does any other federal agency have such a governance structure? Not to my knowledge. Cheers!

  • Pingback: Sanders Paralyzing The Postal Service | The Daily Caller

  • Pingback: First Class! Here’s How Bernie Sanders Might Be DESTROYING The Post Office | News4Security

  • Pingback: Is Bernie Sanders Playing Pork Barrel Politics With The Postal Service?

Top



Email this page.
Print Friendly and PDF