If the US Postal Service is self-sustaining, why does the Federal Government choose to retain full ownership?

Avatar of The Politicus
The Politicus
Sep 29, 2021 09:34 PM 0 Answers
Member Since Sep 2018
Subscribed Subscribe Not subscribe

The United States Postal Service is a federal agency that receives no taxpayer funding. If the Post Office receives no taxpayer funding and can carry out its mission sustainably if not for that whole "pension" business, why does the Federal Government place the Post Office in a position where the Government can legally dictate Post Office policy?

I'm not necessarily talking about privatization, by the way. At least not in the sense that the common folk understand it.

I'm just trying to make sense of why the feds want to retain control of an agency they don't fund, as opposed to - say - giving full ownership and decision-making over to the Postmasters.

To me it's basically the feds saying: "We're gonna boss you around like a government agency, but we're not going to fund you like one."

0 Subscribers
Submit Answer
Please login to submit answer.
0 Answers
Sort By:

  • September 29, 2021