Should the USPS be spun off?

Should the USPS be spun off?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • No

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    2
  • This poll will close: .
Diogenes

Diogenes

Nemo me impune lacessit
maxresdefault.jpg



Article 1 section 8, clause 7 grants Congress the authority to establish post offices & post roads— “establish” doesn’t necessarily mean “run”, which should leave room to privatize under the 9A & 10A.


Discuss (and vote). :thup:
 
Unfortunately, the USPS is written into law in the Constitution.

The Constitution and the Postal System | Constitution Center

President-elect Donald Trump has revived talk from his previous term of moving to privatize the United States Postal System. To be sure, such a process would be complicated and would likely require an act of Congress.
constitutioncenter.org

So, unless you can change that and get the requirement(s) for a postal service out of the Constitution, it's gotta stay.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Unfortunately, the USPS is written into law in the Constitution.

The Constitution and the Postal System | Constitution Center

President-elect Donald Trump has revived talk from his previous term of moving to privatize the United States Postal System. To be sure, such a process would be complicated and would likely require an act of Congress.
constitutioncenter.org

So, unless you can change that and get the requirement(s) for a postal service out of the Constitution, it's gotta stay.
Click to expand...
​

Article 1 section 8, clause 7 grants Congress the authority to establish post offices & post roads— “establish” doesn’t necessarily mean “run”, which should leave room to privatize under the 9A & 10A.
 
Diogenes said:
​

Article 1 section 8, clause 7 grants Congress the authority to establish post offices & post roads— “establish” doesn’t necessarily mean “run”, which should leave room to privatize under the 9A & 10A.
Click to expand...
It does mean that Congress has ultimate control, which in effect does mean "run."
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It does mean that Congress has ultimate control, which in effect does mean "run."
Click to expand...


Does it?

The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly prohibit the United States Postal Service (USPS) from being run by a private company, but it does grant Congress the authority to establish and regulate postal services. Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the Constitution, known as the Postal Clause, states that Congress shall have the power "To establish Post Offices and post Roads." This gives Congress broad discretion over how the postal system is structured and operated.

Historically, the USPS has operated as a government entity, evolving from the Post Office Department (established in 1792) into the modern USPS in 1971 under the Postal Reorganization Act. This act transformed it into an independent agency of the executive branch, though it still operates under congressional oversight and with certain public service mandates, like universal mail delivery.

There’s no explicit constitutional requirement that the postal service must remain a government-run operation. Congress could, in theory, delegate or privatize postal functions to a private company, as long as it maintains its constitutional authority over the system. Legal scholars and courts have generally interpreted the Postal Clause as giving Congress flexibility in implementation—whether through a public entity or private contractors. In fact, the USPS already relies heavily on private companies (e.g., FedEx, UPS) for certain logistics and transportation services, showing that private involvement isn’t constitutionally barred.



@Grok
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top