Senate GOP Has Made Their Decision on Whether They'll Nuke the Filibuster
This House GOP Rep Is Missing...and He Represents One of the Most Competitive...
A Reporter Asked This Question Regarding Iran...and It Set Trump Off
It's an Underreported Story, But Also a Glaring National Security Issue
From Death Row: ‘Thank You’ From Christian Brothers Facing Execution for Their Faith
Did Hakeem Jeffries Just Try to Intimidate the Virginia Supreme Court?
Rich NY Writer Who Called Stealing a 'Political Protest' Melts Down When Confronted...
Teenage Girl Suffers Concussion After Vicious Daylight Attack in NYC
A Virginia Democrat Just Proved His Party Doesn't Understand Rural America
Illegal Alien in Custody Following Horror Attack on Mom, Three-Year-Old Girl at San...
Australia and Sweden Teamed Up for the Most Unnecessary Scientific Study of All...
Search and Rescue Efforts Underway After Massive Tornado Strikes Vance Air Force Base...
A 21st Century Declaration of American Ideals
Exposed: A Suspected Sex Trafficking Operation Steps From NBC, Fox News in Midtown...
Trump Cuts FDA Red Tape on Ibogaine: Veterans Finally Get a Real Shot...
OPINION

Should the USPS Diversify into Nonpostal Markets?

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Should the USPS Diversify into Nonpostal Markets?

One possible solution offered up for the struggling U.S. Postal Service is to allow it to diversify into nonpostal commercial markets (e.g., insurance, logistics, banking, etc). After all, the share of revenue generated from diversified products at foreign posts has been on the rise and in many cases now accounts for the majority of a post’s revenue.

Advertisement

However, a new paper from postal expert Michael Schuyler concludes that the USPS entering “new nonpostal commercial ventures would probably end badly.” Here are some of the important takeaways from Mike’s paper:

  • “When foreign posts move into nonpostal markets, they often extract large sums from postal ratepayers and the government (which ultimately means taxpayers) to cover start-up costs.” The USPS is bleeding red ink and thus doesn’t have money for start-up costs – so it doesn’t take a genius to see where the money would have to come from.
  • When it comes to nonpostal commercial ventures, the USPS has an abysmal track record. Mike cites a Government Accountability Office report that looked at new postal products introduced over a two-year period and notes that “Among the nonpostal products on the list were retail merchandise sales (profitable), several electronic initiatives (all money losers), and the processing of credit card payments (unprofitable).”
  • Diversified products at foreign posts usually earn lower returns compared to industry averages. “Below-average profits suggest that when postal operators enter nonpostal commercial markets, they displace more efficient private-sector businesses, leading to less productive and vibrant economies.”
Advertisement
  • Would the USPS and its new private sector competitors operate on a neutral playing field? That’s doubtful. As I note in an essay on postal privatization, the USPS already enjoys several privileges including exemptions from taxes and various regulatory requirements. Mike notes that “special breaks [for the USPS] would misallocate resources, raise fairness issues, and might have high costs for the overall economy.”

In sum, it’s a really bad idea. Unfortunately, policymakers in Washington have a soft spot for bad ideas.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement