Taking the Mail Out of Politics

An astronaut bound for the moon traverses the 240,000 miles in four days. A letter mailed from Boston to New York may take as much or more time to reach a destination only 229 miles away. In the process, it may be mangled, misdirected or destroyed. And, pace Herodotus, snow, rain, heat, gloom of night and archaic facilities continually slow, if they do not entirely stay, the U.S. mail's appointed rounds. Last week the Administration advanced a sensible if quixotic proposal to make the Post Office an efficient public service. "There is no Democratic or Republican way of delivering the mail," Nixon said, "there is only the right way."

The key element of the Nixon proposal is the elimination of congressional control over the Post Office. The Nixon reform would establish an independent Government agency called the U.S. Postal Service to be run by a nine-man board of directors, seven of whom would be appointed by the President, subject to Senate confirmation. The office of Postmaster General, a Cabinet-rank post, would be abolished.

Cash for Construction. Under this plan, postal workers would be transferred into a new postal-career service with full retention of their civil service benefits. Since Congress would no longer be setting wage rates, the employees would have the right to collective bargaining. Postal rates under the Nixon reform would be recommended by a separate three-man advisory group whose suggestions would be acted upon by the nine-man controlling board; however, rate changes would still require congressional approval.

Nixon's proposal could provide important benefits for the mail. The department would be freed from the shackles of political patronage, parsimonious appropriations and a jungle of congressional rules and regulations that often thwart efficiency. The reorganization would also provide a financial flexibility now sadly lacking by allowing the postal service to float bonds to pay for the estimated $5 billion-worth of plant and equipment improvements needed to achieve modernization.

So far, so good. The main trouble with Nixon's proposal is that it would eliminate the Congressman's main fount of patronage. The largesse includes 33,000 postmasterships and 34,000 rural free delivery jobs, all of which are doled out as political tribute with guidance from members of Congress.

Waiting in Line. By suggesting a plan that would end such bounties, Nixon angered no one more than his fellow Republicans in Congress. G.O.P. House Leader Gerald Ford told Nixon: "Our people have been waiting for eight years to get in front of the line on postal patronage. And they are bitter that a Republican White House wants to turn off the spigot before they have even had a drink."

Paradoxically, whatever chance the Administration proposal will have in Congress depends less on Nixon's Postmaster General, Winton (Red) Blount, than on that Democratic stalwart, Lawrence F. O'Brien. Blount admits that he has developed a reputation as being "the worst politician in Washington," and there are few on the Hill who would disagree. He avoided consulting with congressional leaders on the new proposal until the last minute, for instance, and has remained practically unknown to the postal workers' union chiefs. O'Brien's political powers are obviously needed to soften the opposition, and he is cooperating.

Basket Case. Among the most fervent foes of reform are the postal workers' unions, which are among the most powerful lobbyists in Washington. Five hundred thousand strong, the postal workers represent a massive voting bloc. They do not relish the idea of Congress relinquishing control of the Post Office because they would lose their political leverage when looking for pay raises. Congress has, in fact, raised the postal workers' salaries until they compare favorably with wages in industry. In many close House districts, re-election may depend on how much of the postal workers' voting bloc the incumbent can corral.

The mutual benefit of this arrangement is clear. Says James H. Rademacher, president of the National Association of Letter Carriers: "I could buy every ingredient in Nixon's package if Congress retained its control. I look at that proposed board of directors, and I see money signs in their eyeballs. These guys would be interested in only one thing--a self-supporting operation, and public service would be sacrificed every time."

There does not seem much left to sacrifice. As it is now constituted, the Post Office is the Government's basket case. There is a 23% average turnover in personnel every year; 85% of all employees are in the five lowest pay grades. Operations are guided by a vast hodgepodge of rules and regulations that fill a 9 1/2lb. volume. The accumulated need for facilities and equipment exceeds $5 billion; yet the proposed construction of any major postal facility usually takes eight to ten years to win congressional approval.

It is the public, of course, that suffers. Items:

> One month last year, all the Social Security checks for Puerto Rico were sent to Honolulu.

> An attorney in Philadelphia complained that it took eleven days for a will he prepared to reach his client in Wilmington, Del., a distance of 30 miles.

> Earlier this year, an automatic mail sorter went haywire in a large Midwestern city with the result that eastbound mail was sent west. Several hundred thousand pounds of mail were shipped before the error was discovered.

As of now, the Nixon proposal stands little chance of success. The Senate and House are strongly against it. In all likelihood, effective reform of the Post Office may not occur until the point --perhaps not too distant--at which mail service becomes so flagrantly bad that public wrath outweighs the political advantages of an antediluvian, public-be-damned system.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.