I agree, save the Postal Service with the money wasted all over the world in foreign aid and foreign adventures. Money spent that doesn't benefit anybody in the U.S.!

What $5 bill a year theft by the right?

Lets all remember that the post office pays for its self. No tax money funds the post office. It is also required by our constitution. Yep that's right it says we will have a post office system in our constitution. The only money problem that the post office has it congress taking their money and using it to fund other departments that they have not funded. The post office works and works well. Move into a small town where UPS does not deliver and see how much you like the Post Office. Who do you think is delivering their packages in rural areas, it is not UPS. Not all of Americans live in a big city.

“We do not currently have the flexibility in our business model to achieve all of these cost reductions. To do so, the Postal Service requires the enactment of comprehensive, long-term legislation to provide it with needed flexibility,” Donahoe added.

Specifically, legislation is needed that would do the following:

• Resolve a unique law requiring the Postal Service to make $5.5 billion annual payments to prefund retirement health benefits
• Return $6.9 billion in Federal Employees Retirement System overpayments
• Grant the Postal Service the authority to determine delivery frequency
• Allow the Postal Service to restructure its healthcare system to make it independent of federal programs
• Grant the Postal Service the authority to provide a defined contribution retirement plan for new hires, rather than today’s defined benefit plan
• Streamline the process for product development and pricing.

Senator Collins is definitely part of the problem - she feels that Congress needs to make the rules for facility closure. There are executives in the Postal Service who are paid the big bucks to make the business decisions. How about a law from Congress that lets the managers manage the business?

Or, if Congress is going to micro-manage, eliminate all the HQ jobs except the PMG, who can be a $50k/year PR figurehead (position required by the Constitution.) Congress can decide rates, decide which offices to close, set staffing and hours, negotiate with the unions and associations, contract with the transport companies and landlords, etc. And when money is short, Congress can increase the debt to fund it.

Corie, now that Ive switched to online bill pay I litterally receive no legitimate mail. Everything is ads. Every few months Ill get a wedding invite.

Lets save all the money, and privatise Congress.

Pike Lake

The government can't run anything efficiently. And their solution is to throw money at the problem. Without knowing what the problem is.

So what you are proposing is that the DEFENSE DEPT be closed... the MOST massive fraud of ALL ?

The SENATE & HOUSE shuttered because they are the ones spending the tax money ?

The MINT & TREASURY dismantled.. because THEY MAKE & distribute it ?

YOU Sir, are an EXTREMIST, IGNORANT and a THREAT to the future of this nation...

I can only HOPE FOR YOUR SAKE that you are posting from Syria or IRAN .

IF you don't like the taxation system in the USA you are free to move to all the better places palsie...

It was the GOP that instilled LOVE IT OF LEAVE IT into the minds of EVERY American...

live or die by your own rhetoric !

Why save it? The present system is a dinosaur and should be relegated to the National Museum along with the bones of the Pony Express horse.

Let the Postal Service run itself .Get congress out of their business and they will make it. Congress should have no say in what they do

Carie, I agree that the Postal Service should, not needs, to be saved. It's a service that the government contracts for and it tries to run like a business, which it is. It runs efficiently because it has too run efficiently, and by efficient I mean that it's safer to send jewelry now by mail than by courier. Mail gets to where it's going, if, addressed properly and in the case of local mail that isn't always necessary given that the mail carriers know everyone. It's not easy to run efficiently when someone can buy a acre, move a trailer on it, put up a mailbox and tell the local Postmaster that he's ready to send and receive mail. That one mail box may cause a big re-scheduling of routes, not to mention that one box may increase a mail carriers pay to the next level. There are some things that could be done, in the area of rural mail delivery. Apartment complexes, some of them, have a centralized area for mail boxes, a carrier doesn't have to go building to building. When I ran a rural route I thought that it would be much better if there were centralized rural mail points. Lol, yeah, and if that were done you'd never hear the end of the squalling. Anyway, we have a great postal system, it works, people can send mail for peanuts, yet, lol, talk about raising the price of a stamp a few cents and folks come unglued. We just have to pay for it.

Most people need to understand that the goverment has bleed all profits away from the Post Office,they will find away to keep doing so.Its five billon a year!!! As for benifits,their no better than anyone else, such as UPS. AS for a $25000 buyout most wont take it, after paying taxes,healthcare etc there isnt much left for the next twenty yrs.

The Postal Service is just that--a service provided by the Government of the United States of America to the people who live in it--and one that they do very well. It was never intended to make a profit or be run like a business. The Founders realized this when they set it up. They don't sell anything but service--and the foolish business hacks who run it now have forgotten that. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that you can't strengthen a service by cutting the very service it provides--whether by reduction of service standards or manpower--the outcome is the same. Is there any infrastructure in this country more basic than the Mail? Do we really want to dismantle this? Congress should vote to support the Postal Service as needed beyond the income derived from the sale of postal products.

Having spent a good portion of my life living in small communities in the largest and third largest states in the U.S., the postal service has been an important part of life there. Some of the mail sent through some of the private carriers, like UPS and Fed Ex, ends up being delivered by the post office. I frequently send packages through the mail and use the one price boxes. I have been so impressed with the postal service and can't imagine using any of the private shipping services. I got to the post office a few minutes late one day and didn't get my grandchild's package in the mail. I wanted it to be there for her birthday so I ran to FedEx. They weighed the box and told me for overnight (which was really 2 day and still wouldfn't be gauranteed for delivery until Monday) it would cost me $114.00. For slower service (4 day) it would be $87.00. Either way, it was not guaranteed to be there in time for her birthday on Saturday (It was Wednesday), even with the higher "overnight" price. I said forget it and mailed it from the post office the next day for $10.43 or something like that. It arrived on Saturday morning. 1530 miles away, and it got there faster than the private carriers could have gotten it there and it cost a fraction. I couldn't afford the FedEx shipment and my grandchild would not get too many things from her grandparents if we had to depend on them to do our shipping. We need the post offices- all of them. Not only would the loss of jobs cripple our economy again, but for too many people, the post offices are a necessity. People get everything in the mail- from medications to garden plants and seeds. We must keep them going and the first thing they need to change is the requirement Congress passed that made the post office put up 75 years of retirements that no other private company has to do. They need to rethink that process and stop making it impossible for the post office to compete with private carriers who don't have to live with those restrictions..

A little about me. I live in Omaha.. Home of the oracle.. And I have done well thanks to certain groups.. My hard work really meant nothing after a certain knowledge with them.. I met a man some 25 years back while doing something I am now disgusted that I did. The county told me this man was crazy.. rich, but crazy.. While taking advantage of his unwillingness to bow to the system I became personally attached.. He turned out to be the man who taught economics as the professor at Yale University from the 30s 40s & 50s .. I could not get his message through my thick head for years but after he told me that the people he had taught had went on to abuse the people in a monetary system that the people do not understand and spoke of names in certain circles I had already belonged to.. I was very, very interested for my own personal gain to learn.. People need to start attempting to understand the worlds history with what society thinks money is.. In American history it becomes real interesting and once you understand it you'll realize it is the foundation of liberty.. Of us.. I challenge you to look at Warren Buffets father.. Is Warren an oracle, or does he just have an understanding.. Warrens father would be turning over in his grave if he knew Warren used his knowledge for personal lusts rather than staying true with the way of liberty like his father represented.. The point is, till we ALL at least have a little understanding of our monetary policy, things will only get worse.. Same message from Paul.. Henry Ford claimed "If the people knew the direction of the monetary goal there would surly be a revolution to stop it".. Something that really scares me is that crazy old professor,, he taught me that the post office is the best measure of how the condition of the system is.. and how to track this horrible Keynesian system to its inevitable demise as all fiat systems of the worlds history has shown that they do end.. Always.. If you wish to save the post office as well as this great country we best learn our history.. And FAST.. This will be the last walking Thomas Jefferson to be proven as a record for years to come that we could vote in for true change... I and I have not even touched on the most holy document "The US Constitution".. RON PAUL 2012

The problem is that Congress wants the USPS to operate like a business, yet they preclude them from making any strategic business decisions. The USPS can not make decisions about which post offices it should keep and which ones could go. When business slows down, stores that are close to each other are often consolidated into one location. Congress will not allow the USPS to do this. Businesses set the prices for their services yet Congress dictates to the USPS what they can charge for delivering different classes of mail. If Congress really wants the USPS to be self sufficient and pay for itself, then they need to get out of the way and let the people running the organization make the business decisions that are needed in order to make that happen. Right now Congress is just demonstrating their typical hypocrisy in a grand fashion.

The term "logical standards" does not apply to Senators and Congressmen. Once again, budget cutting is anathema in Washington. Close down unnecessary mail processing centers and send a message to the whinny weasels. Enough of this kick the can bailout crap.

The USPS should do like Sears and close unprofitable offices. They need to act like a BUSINESS not like a gov't agency.

I saw Reid make a comment today, saying that old folks rely on junk mail to stay in touch with the outside world haha. It was almost as good as his "cowboy poetry" plead! Who votes for this guy? hahah

Turn the Post Office over to the private sector. In fact turn everything over that the government does to the private sector except the military of course. The private sector would turn a profit in no time and we would get rid of all the waste that is our big bloated inefficient government.

lets see here, we have a US constitution that tells the federal government what they must and what they cant do, there is no middle ground in the constitution.

Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

how clear is section 8? it says right there that congress shall establish post offices and postal routes, so whats the big deal people? is it that hard to abide by the constitution? are the american citizens too lazy to hold congress to our legally binding contract? why is there any other discussion besides the ones that forces congress to DO ITS FKING JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

how long would you be employed with work ethics like congress? so why are they allowed to do what they want? its not their money, its not their country and for damn sure they work for us, not the other way around. they are public servants by choice but they act like tyrants by nature.

I'm just glad the Secret Service that we pay for are doing such a great job! I am thrilled that they finally neutralized the Ted Nugent threat!

And they did that skorned through the skirt of an $800 hooker.

Although they need to downsize, I think the plan is a bit radical. Instead of closing the 200 centers, downsize all of the centers. The only places that should be eliminated are ones that are leased spaces.

It's time the postal commission stops cutting the requests for increases. Bulk mail is far too inexpensive increase the price.

Some communities will need to give up the full service post office, but keep a full-service post office within 30 minutes. There should be more services franchised to say grocery stores just as it was in the early 1900's.

Previous downsizing of postal stations abandoned owned buildings that were newer than leased spaces.

It's probably a bit late for the employees to contribute more to the health insurance and retirements, but that should be looked at too.

EVERYONE needs to share.

Bailout, my @$$!!! Shut this useless, antiquated piece of crap system down! We DON'T NEED IT! ANYTHING done by USPS can be done better, quicker, and more efficiently other ways!!

They need to stop paying penions 50 years into the future. Let the people who were paid to run the Post Office run it. Keep congressed dumb hands off it. The Post Office is still very profitable it still makes a whole lot of money. Unfortunately it is tied the government for decision making and we know from experience that most of those people could decide their way out of a paper bag. This is a problem that government made itself. All those people who are talking about privatizing the Post Office should know that all those private shipping industries use the post office to ship things. The Post Office is very efficient its just the fools in government that make it look weak.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. said it was "unthinkable" that the Postal Service could cease operation

Not so Liebermaennchen! It is an unprofitable bloated outfit that needs to go and make room for an organization suitable for the 21st Century.

This is one of the few times I side with the Democrats. I am especially upset with John McCain, a supposed hawk for military veterans yet wants to dismantle one of the biggest supporters of veteran jobs, the USPS. Nowhere does he acknowledge he was one of the biggest reason the USPS is in this predicament since he voted for the ridiculous 2006 bill. Makes absolutely NO sense.

Db Akron Most of the things U say don't sound bad but as far as the employes contributing to their own anything is wrong. Most employees are on the FERS system. They contribute through SSAN, TSP, and the Postal Service itself. The postal Service pays 900.00 per month for retirement at the age of 58. At 62 the SSAN pays 1400, at 65 pays 1900, and at 70 pays 2500 per month. Tsp is similar to a 401K. You can take it at the age of 59 1/2 while still active.

Health Care is 400 a month in premium payments along with a deductable (yearly) and a $30 copay.

I think they do share for what they REALLY get.

There already private alternatives available like UPS and Fedx. Granted that their services cost more but they will deliver things.

The Senate first needs to pass a budget for the federal government which has been running at a huge loss. The President has promised the American people that the 2012 federal deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars yet the White House is predicting that the 2012 federal deficit will be more than 5 times what the President promised. The Senate needs to help the President to keep his promise to the American people. Bankruptcy reorganization seems to be the best way to make the postal system solvent. The federal government is already more than 15 trillion dollars in debt and does not have any money to bale out the postal system.

Quoted from the article:

"Action on the bill was temporarily derailed when Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., tried on Tuesday to get a vote on an amendment to the postal bill aimed at cutting off U.S. aid to Egypt unless Cairo ends prosecution of American citizens pursuing pro-democracy action in the African nation."

REPLY: Rand Paul, hero of the "Tea Party", holds up an important bill for his own purposes to propose an "amendment" which has no connection whatsoever with the bill being debated.

Beautiful! Well, so much for 'responsibility' and 'good governance' promises made under the banner of the "Tea Party." Ridiculous buffoons, all.

Will Haas I agree with U about your last sentence but you are wrong about UPS and Fed Ex. The Postal Service delievers more packages for UPS and Fed Ex than those companies do. I know!! I deliever them. What a joke.

GAWD too phuny...and this from the folks that want to bring you health care???? HA HA

TRUE REASON FOR POSTAL SERVICE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS. The post office is not broke. A bill passed by congress in 2006 requiring them to setaside funds for a 75 year liabilty for its pension fund, which is ridiculous and creating operational financial deficiencies. This requires them to setaside money for people who are not born yet. The post office has always been run as a business, self sufficient, and used the accural accounting practices and procedures like other businesses. Federal budgetary accounting standards, which is used by Agencies who operate on appropriations not their own revenues like the Post Office, requires the upfront funding of the 75 year liability. I don't know why congress made this move in 2006 as I havent had he opportunity to look at the legislative history and etc. However, the bottomline is that it's ridiculous. How can the post office be expected to compete with other mail delivery services when they are burdened with unwarranted and ridiculous requirements from congress. Just an assumption, I would not be surprise if the parent companies for those other delivery services pressure congress to slowly chip away at the postal service.

Postal workers need our assistance in overturning this requirement. I am aware of the problem as I am an auditor who audits commerical and government entities. When I stopped my mailman a few weeks ago and talked about this issue, he was amazed that I was aware of it and near tears as he spoke of the frustration among the workers. Most postal employees are aware of the pension liability requirement and feel powerless as their efforts to overturn this requirement has been fruitless. Their consituency, the american public, need to join them in having this rule overturned.

Why save it? The present system is a dinosaur and should be relegated to the National Museum along with the bones of the Pony Express horse.

Because it is a necessity. Not everyone can pay their bills online.

why is it so hard for politicians to do the right thing in a timely manner? Because they fear a) not getting re-elected, b) they will lose the bribes, er-"contributions" they get from special interests to get re-elected, c) they will have to get a real job in the private sector.

Can anyone say "term limits"? And no, the alleged ability to vote them out doesn't count as term limits. Once elected they use the power of the office and sell votes to make sure they stay in. Although, always voting against incumbents is a worthy idea.

Corie, now that Ive switched to online bill pay I litterally receive no legitimate mail.

Lucky you. But, what about people who can't afford computers and ISP services, or those who live where broadband isn't available at any price?

"Its failure would deliver a crushing blow to our economy at a time when the economy is already fragile and it would be particularly harmful to people living and working in rural America," said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine

BULLSH! Susan Collins

Harry Reid...

"We need to save the postal service becasue old people like junk mail, for some, it is their only form of communication with the outside world."

Are you EFFING kidding me, this is the leader of the senate. What an EFFING DUMBAZZ!!!

The Postal Service is geared to handle Millions and Millions of peices of mail, it no longer has the volume that it did in the past. For obvious reasons, it never will.

LET IT FAIL, QUIT EFFING PICKING WINNERS AND LOSERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually the fact is the Post Office is obligated by law to stay within a diminutive 2 to 3 percent profit margin, PERIOD!

It's the only quasi-government company WITHOUT ANY government funding but government steals billions to fund FUTURE expenditures and FUTURE retirement/health benefits.

The fact is NO other government (quasi or otherwise) performs under this duress. Compare: Freddie Mac, Gennie Mae and ALL of the other government regulatory agencies "supporting" the executive, legislative or judicial branches of our government are in fact FULLY GOVERNMENT FUNDED that consumes over 20 BILLION A MONTH to stay afloat (they've been operating under the same conditions for generations, with no end it sight). They are all unionized with pensions, health benefits and bonuses to boot.

As Parrish said: Please inform us of any other government or private corporation/company that operates under these restrictions and conditions and still makes a profit?

REALITY CHECK: You got it, NOT ONE, PERIOD! Whether it the FBI, Secret Service, FDA, Homeland Security, CIA, Aircraft Controllers, Army, Navy, Air force, every regulatory commission you can think of is 100% fully funded by our tax dollars including all pensions and health benefits. Yet nobody is belly aching about overspending and government waste until it comes to the U S Postal Service, and again it's the only branch of government that is NOT FUNDED by even one lousy penny of our tax dollars! Please take a moment to reflect on this; NOT ONE PENNY!

To save the Postal Service is to get the legislative branches sticky fingers out of it, stop them from stealing the Postal Service money it earns!

You have top executives with monumental pay and benefits sitting in Washington DC who are appointed by the President of the United States, and absolutely know nothing about the U S Postal Service, you never ever see them touring through any post office. That whole building in DC is occupied by executive pencil pushers delegating their existence to other glorified pencil pushers into the districts and distribution centers across America who in turn sharpen more boxes of pencils for every post office in each city or town. Mind you these Postmasters make good salaries and benefits and each have their own entourage or staff of followers that do nothing more than bring coffee and donuts for the boss along with an occasional sexual scandal. Fact is if you have friends in high places you get these jobs depending on the level of "friends."

Want maximum efficiency for your dollars, get rid of all political appointees, get rid of all postmasters and their staffs. O

Stop the lies about the USPS, and tell the truth, it is having problems because the legislative branch cannot keep their dirty paws off of its money, off of Social Security monies, etc.

Dump the domestic enemies who did not keep their Oath, everyone who voted "yes" for NDAA, everyone that supported extending the Patriot Act, everyone who lines their pocket from foreign nations and sells the USA out!!

FYI: Those who have not kept the Oath are prosecutable, and impeachable. Those who qualify as *Domestic Enemies are prosecutable and impeachable.

* "Domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution.

Simple, deliver mail 3 times a week, fire the bureaucrats. According to the statistics USPS delivered in the article 1.5 pieces of mail are delivered each day to every person in the states. Just double up to 3 pieces delivered three times a week, or 3 pieces per person 3 times a week. This is just a political football that has gone into quadruple overtime with idiots and overpaid no nothings who can't or don't want to fix it. Times change, the post office people for the last ten years sucked on one thumb and sat on the other and now are bitching.

The US Constitution requires the federal government to fund and operate a postal system. It's common sense that they should be able to charge a fee that turns a small profit for their services and keeps the service solvent. Unfortunately the Congress doesn't think that the Postal Service should be profitable. They don't care about the constitution or the people they represent.

We ought to make USPS into a bank and also keep it as a post office.

There is your solution. If it operated as a bank we would have the ability for small towns to have there own branch of the bank too. The fees would add up and make it solvent.

OBAMA ADMITTS NOT REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE

Watch the trial!!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OwmfisorUcc#!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHKJQ__W_4k&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JohAu0BR_w0

BYE BYE OBAMA,,, YOUR NOT AMERICAN

http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/200907280002

The
Definitive Birther Takedown

July 28, 2009 10:07 am ET

A growing chorus of fringe conservatives, ranging from members
of Congress to Lou Dobbs, have started echoing the "birthers'" claims
that Barack Obama's eligibility for office needs to be examined. Media
Matters Action Network decided to take up the challenge. Needless to say, we found
their evidence rather uncompelling.

MYTH: The
Certification Of Live Birth Is Not Enough Evidence To Confirm His Birth In
Hawaii

Birther Movement Claim:

Obama has NOT provided a certified copy of an original, typed,
vault copy, long-form, birth certificate, signed by his mother and delivering
doctor with the name of the hospital thereon, to be used to conclusively prove
one of the two key elements used in determining his "natural born"
citizenship status per the U.S. Constitution, i.e., where he was born. All he
has provided to the electorate and public to see is a digital image on the
internet of a purported copy of a short, summary, computer printed form called
a Certification of Live Birth, aka COLB, which is not a Birth Certificate. No
one in any controlling legal authority and official expert capacity has ever
been allowed to examine the purported computer made paper document displayed in
the digital images and digital pictures on the internet.
[ObamaCitizenshipFacts.org, accessed 7/27/09]

FACT: Not Only Has The Certificate Of Live Birth Been Verified
By Numerous Officials, Other Primary Source Documents Verify Contents

FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and
photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of
the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims
that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted
high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents"
to this article. [Factcheck.org, 11/1/08]

But the evidence of Barack Obama's birth in Hawaii does not stop
there. Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Hawaii's State Health Director, examined the
document. As reported by the Honolulu Advertiser:

So, in what likely will be a vain attempt to halt the inquiries,
Fukino yesterday issued a statement saying that she and the registrar of vital
statistics personally inspected Obama's birth certificate and found it to be
valid. . . .

Fukino issued her statement to try to stomp out persistent
rumors that Obama was not born in Honolulu - and is therefore not a U.S.
citizen and thus ineligible to run for president.

Fukino, however, repeated the Health Department's position that
state law prohibits her or any other officials from actually releasing the
birth certificate, which Obama's campaign says shows he was born in Honolulu on
Aug. 4, 1961.

"There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein
Obama's official birth certificate," Fukino said in the statement.
"State law (Hawai'i Revised Statutes¤338-18) prohibits the release of a
certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in
the vital record. ... No state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, has ever
instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any
other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai'i." [Honolulu
Advertiser,
11/1/08]

MYTH: Barack Obama Can
Direct The State Of Hawaii To Release His Long Form Birth Certificate

Birther Movement Claim:

The lawsuit has not been dismissed (and others, including one in
Hawaii, have been filed). But it could be quickly settled by Obama and the DNC.
All they need to do is show a certified, long form "Certificate of Live Birth" to the court. [WorldNetDaily, 10/28/08]

FACT: The State Department Of Health No Longer Issues Copies Of
Paper Birth Certificates

As reported by the Honolulu Star Bulletin:

No, you can't obtain a "certificate of live birth"
anymore.

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth
certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live
births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the
state of Hawaii, she said.

And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in
2001.

"At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on)
was put into electronic files for consistent reporting," she said. [Honolulu
Star Bulletin, 6/6/09]

MYTH: The Certificate
Of Live Birth Posted By The Obama Campaign (And Above) Is Forged

Birther Movement Claim:

Additionally, statements by Ron Polarik and private investigator
Jose Barro, showed numerous signs of forgery on the short version COLB posted
by Obama/Soetoro, and Forensic Document expert Sandra Line has issued an
affidavit that Obama's place of birth cannot be ascertained without seeing the
original birth certificate. [DefendOurFreedoms.org, accessed 7/27/09]

FACT: FactCheck.org Viewed The Original Document, Attested To
Its Authenticity

Recently FactCheck representatives got a chance to spend some
time with the birth certificate, and we can attest to the fact that it is real
and three-dimensional and resides at the Obama headquarters in Chicago. We can
assure readers that the certificate does bear a raised seal, and that it's
stamped on the back by Hawaii state registrar Alvin T. Onaka (who uses a
signature stamp rather than signing individual birth certificates). We even
brought home a few photographs. [FactCheck.org, 11/1/08]

MYTH: Foreign-Born
Children Could Acquire Hawaiian Certificates Of Live Birth (COLB)

Birther Movement Claim: According to the Orange
County Weekly:

Taitz and others say they have reason to doubt the veracity of
Obama's COLB. Forensic experts have set up web pages and signed affidavits
saying it's a forgery. There's a law on the books in Hawaii that allows
foreign-born children to obtain a Hawaiian COLB. And the information on a
late-registered COLB doesn't need to be verified by anyone; it's based solely
on the testimony of one parent. [Orange County Weekly, 6/18/09]

FACT: The Law In Question Did Not Exist Until 20 Years Later

The law allowing foreign-born children to obtain Hawaiian COLBs
didn't exist until 20 years after Obama was born, while Obama's published COLB
says his birth information was recorded four days after his birth in 1961. [OC
Weekly,6/18/09]

MYTH: Obama Renounced
His Citizenship While In Indonesia

Birther Movement Claim:

The problem Obama has with that issue is whether his
step-father, who moved the family to Indonesia after marrying his mother,
legally "adopted" him or "acknowledged" him as his son in
Indonesia with the mother's concurrence, thereby renouncing his U.S.
citizenship while living in Indonesia. [ObamaCitizenshipFacts.org, accessed 7/27/09]

FACT: Barack Obama Never Renounced His Citizenship

The primary piece of evidence birthers cite to support this
claim is Barack Obama's Indonesian School Record referenced above. Line 3 of
the document does ask for Barack Obama's country of citizenship and does say
Indonesia. However, Barack Obama's parents' completion of this document does
not mean he renounced his citizenship. In fact, Title
8 > Chapter 12 > Subchapter III > Part III > Section 1481
of the U.S. Code is very clear on this point:

§ 1481. Loss of
nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of
proof; presumptions

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by
birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing
any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States
nationality-

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own
application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after
having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal
declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision
thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state
if

(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the
United States, or

(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned
officer; or

(4)

(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any
office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a
political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he
has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or

(B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any
office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a
political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for
which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of
allegiance is required; or

(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a
diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such
form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or

(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of
nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as
may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be
in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as
not contrary to the interests of national defense; or

(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by
force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or
conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383of
title 18,
or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385of
title 18,
or violating section 2384of
title 18by
engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the
Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is
convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

In addition, according to the State Department website:

B. ELEMENTS OF
RENUNCIATION

A person wishing to
renounce his or her U.S. citizenship must voluntarily and with intent to
relinquish U.S. citizenship:

1. appear in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic
officer,

2. in a foreign country (normally at a U.S. Embassy or
Consulate); and

3. sign an oath of renunciation

Renunciations that do
not meet the conditions described above have no legal effect. [State.gov, accessed 7/27/09;
emphasis added]

Furthermore:

Parents Cannot
Renounce U.S. Citizenship On Behalf Of Their Minor Children. Before an oath of
renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person
under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer
that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of
renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily
seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship. [State.gov, accessed 7/27/09;
emphasis added]

Update: The relevant law at the time was the 1952 Immigration
and Naturalization Act. (However the conclusions are the same.)

LOSS OF NATIONALITY BY NATIVE-BORN OR NATURALIZED CITIZEN

SEC. 349. (a) From and after the effective date of this Act a
person is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization,
shall lose his nationality by

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own
application, upon an application filed in his behalf by a parent, guardian, or
duly authorized agent, or through the naturalization of a parent having legal
custody of such person: Provided, That nationality shall not be lost by any
person under this section as the result of the naturalization of a parent or
parents while such person is under the age of twenty-one years, or as the
result of a naturalization obtained on behalf of a person under twenty-one
years of age by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent, unless such
person shall fail to enter the United States to establish a permanent residence
prior to his twenty-fifth birthday:

Since a school application filled out by his parents meets none
of the above requirements, and a parent cannot renounce citizenship on behalf
of a minor, the birthers' point is moot.

MYTH: Barack Obama Is
Not Eligible To Become President Because Only One Of His Parents Is A U.S.
Citizen

Birther Movement Claim: According to the Orange
County Weekly:

Even if Obama's long-form, original birth certificate were to be
made public, though, the questions from Taitz and others wouldn't stop. There's
a second argument: that there's no way that Obama could fit the definition of a
"natural-born citizen." By turning to Swiss philosophy texts read by
the Founding Fathers, citing the infamous Scott v. Sanford Supreme Court
decision as precedent (which denied citizenship to former slave Dred Scott and
was later overturned) and disqualifying the presidency of Chester A. Arthur,
Taitz is able to claim that a baby can only be a natural-born citizen if both
parents were American citizens at the time of the baby's birth. [OC
Weekly,
6/18/09]

FACT: Barack Obama Qualifies As A Natural Born Citizen Under The
Constitution And Court Precedents

Article 1
Section 2 of the Constitution:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the
United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be
eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to
that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and
been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

14^thAmendment:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of
the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

In addition,United States v.
Wong Kim Ark established the precedent in this case:

Wong Kim Ark's demand for a writ ofhabeas
corpus,
however, was granted because of his contention that he was a United States
citizen. He charged that the Collector of Customs of the Port of San Francisco
and the manager of the steamship company had deprived him of his liberty
without due process. The U.S. District Court for Northern California agreed
that Wong's Fourteenth Amendment rights had been violated. His detention was
ruled illegal and he was released.

The U.S. government appealed the writ, implicitly challenging
Wong's citizenship before the Supreme Court on 5 and 8 March 1897. Ironically,
both sides accepted most of the basic facts of Wong's life. It was agreed that
he had been born in San Francisco in 1873, while his Chinese parents were
considered permanent residents of the city. He had visited China temporarily in
1890 and had returned to San Francisco with no difficulty in passing through
customs. It was further agreed that since his birth, Wong had never had any
other place of residence except California nor had he ever claimed to be
anything other than a United States citizen. Although his parents had returned
to China in 1890, Wong worked in San Francisco, paid his taxes, and had never
participated in any criminal acts. Most significantly, the government's appeal
conceded that the Chinese Exclusion Acts under which Wong had been detained
should not apply to him if he was indeed a U.S. citizen.

A Question of
Birthright

The government claimed that Wong's parentage should determine
his citizenship. Wong's parents were subjects of the Emperor of China at the
time of his birth. Therefore, Wong was likewise a foreign subject. According to
the appeal, Wong was also Chinese by reason of his "race, language, color
and dress." Because he did not belong to any of the classes of Chinese
allowed entry under immigration rules, he was technically considered to be a
laborer and liable to the terms of the Chinese Exclusion Act.

These arguments were no more successful in Washington D.C. than
they had been in San Francisco. The Court rejected the appeal on 28 March 1898,
over a year after hearing the case. Writing for the majority, Justice Gray
noted the Constitution's deep roots in English common law. By this tradition,
all persons born within England's domain could expect protection from the King,
to whom they were expected to owe their allegiance. Gray traced the lineage of
this concept of determining citizenship by birthplace from its English origins
to standard practice in the American states.

The Court found its strongest reason for affirming Wong's
citizenship in the Fourteenth Amendment. Ratified by Congress in 1868, the
amendment was designed to grant the rights of citizenship to persons of African
descent who had been slaves prior to the Civil War. To the majority, Section I
of the amendment was unequivocal:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of
the State in which they reside.

It should be noted that the Dred Scott case cited by Taitz and
other birthers was decided in 1857,
a decade before the 14^th amendment was ratified.

MYTH: Barack Obama's
Grandmother Witnessed His Birth in Kenya

Birther Movement Claim:

The Pennsylvania Democrat who has sued Sen. Barack Obama
demanding he prove his American citizenship - and therefore qualification to
run for president - has confirmed he has a recording of a telephone call from
the senator's paternal grandmother confirming his birthin Kenya. . .

"This has been a real sham he's pulled off for the last 20
months," Berg told Savage. "I'll release it [the tape] in a day or
two, affidavits from her talking to a certain person. I heard
the tape. She was speaking [to someone] here in the United States." He
said the telephone call was from Obama's paternal grandmother affirming she
"was in the delivery room in Kenya when he was born Aug. 4, 1961." [WorldNetDaily,October 23, 2008]

FACT: This Is A Myth Based On A Cropped Version Of An Interview
With Obama's Grandmother Sarah:

From Salon.com's War Room:

In that interview, Sarah Obama does in fact say at one point
that she was there for her grandson's birth. But that was a mistake, a
confusion in translation. As soon as a jubilant McRae began to press her for
further details about her grandson being born in Kenya, the family realized the
mistake and corrected him. And corrected him. (The audio is available for
download here.)

No matter, though, because people who believe in a conspiracy
theory simply hear what
they want to hear. So some Birther sites have posted transcripts
and YouTube clips that end abruptly with the mistranslation
and don't include the corrections. McRae, for his part, included the full
translation in his affidavit -- he thinks it's all just part of the conspiracy.
"Some few younger relatives, including [translator Vitalis Akech
Ogombe]," McRae wrote in his court filing, "have obviously been
versed to counter such facts with the common purported information from the
American news media that Obama was born in Hawaii."

Here's the conversation:

MCRAE: Could I ask her about his actual birthplace? I would like
to see his birthplace when I come to Kenya in December. Was she present when he
was born in Kenya?

OGOMBE: Yes. She says, yes, she was, she was present when Obama
was born.

MCRAE: When I come in December. I would like to come by the
place, the hospital, where he was born. Could you tell me where he was born?
Was he born in Mombasa?

OGOMBE: No, Obama was not born in Mombasa. He was born in
America.

MCRAE: Whereabouts was he born? I thought he was born in Kenya.

OGOMBE: No, he was born in America, not in Mombasa.

MCRAE: Do you know where he was born? I thought he was born in
Kenya. I was going to go by and see where he was born.

OGOMBE: Hawaii. Hawaii. Sir, she says he was born in Hawaii. In
the state of Hawaii, where his father was also learning, there. The state of
Hawaii. [Salon.com, 6/27/09]

MYTH: Obama Travelled
To Pakistan At A Time When There Was A Ban On U.S. Passport Holders Entering
That Country.

Birther Movement Claim: Obama Traveled to
Indonesia, Pakistan and India in 1981, when he was Twenty (20) Years Old on his
Indonesian Passport

Obama traveled to Indonesia, Pakistan and Southern India in
1981. The relations between Pakistan and India were extremely tense and
Pakistan was in turmoil and under martial law. The country was filled with
Afghan refugees; and Pakistan's Islamist-leaning Interservices Intelligence
Agency (ISI) had begun to provide arms to the Afghan mujahideen and to assist
the process of recruiting radicalized Muslim men--jihadists-from around the
world to fight against the Soviet Union. Pakistan was so dangerous that it was
on the State Department's travel ban list for U.S. Citizens. [ObamaCrimes.com,
accessed 7/26/09]

FACT: No Such Ban Existed

From FactCheck.org:

But that claim is quite false. There was no such ban. Americans
traveled there without incident, as shown by a travel piece
that appeared in the New
York Times in 1981, dated June 14. Barbara Crossette,
an assistant news editor of the Times, told her mostly
American readers they could travel to Lahore, Pakistan, by air, rail or road,
adding: "Tourists can obtain a free, 30-day visa (necessary for Americans)
at border crossings and airports."

Her article prompted a letter to the Times from the U.S. consul
general in Lahore saying he would "welcome an influx of Americans" to
Lahore. He cautioned only that in addition to getting a visa for Pakistan,
American visitors also should be careful to line up an Indian visa for the
return trip if they planned to travel overland. The letter is dated Aug. 23,
1981.

Also, a travel advisory from the State Department dated Aug. 17,
1981 notes that Americans traveling to Pakistan require a 30-day visa, and that
any staying longer must check in with Pakistan's Foreigner Registration Office.
A digital copy of
the advisory is archived at the Electronic Research Collection,
a partnership between the State Department and the Federal Depository Library
at the University of Illinois at Chicago. [FactCheck.org, 6/5/09]

MYTH: The Military
Revoked The Deployment Papers Of A Major Scheduled To Deploy To Afghanistan
After Arguing He Should Not Be Required To Serve Under A President Who Has Not
Proven His Eligibility For Office.

Birther Movement Claim: WorldNetDaily
wrote:

A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for
deployment to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders revoked after
arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven
his eligibility for office.

His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has
rescinded his impending deployment orders. [WorldNetDaily, 7/14/09]

FACT: Major Cook Volunteered For A One-Year Assignment In
Afghanistan In May And Only Brought His Suit In June.

Lt. Comm. William Speaks, a spokesman for Centcom stated:

"Maj. Cook volunteered for the one year assignment to
Afghanistan, in May of this year," said Speaks. "After he brought
this stuff to the fore, the unit that owned his billet canceled his
orders."

Speaks dismissed comments that Cook's attorney Orly Taitz, made
to WorldNetDaily, specifically her claim that "the military has directly
responded by saying Obama is illegitimate."

"This in no way
validates any of the outlandish claims made by Maj. Cook or his attorney,"
said Speaks. "The idea that this validates those charges about the
president's fitness for office is simply false." [Washington
Independent, 7/15/09]

care, funny how you claim to be so worried avout your kids future, yet want to allow pollution to kill them.

let these libertarians strip all environmental regulations like they want to and your kids won't be able to breath the air or drink the water.

and WTF does your birther idiocy have to do with anything on this thread!!??

LET IT FAIL, QUIT EFFING PICKING WINNERS AND LOSERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK, Let's start with subsidies to the big oil companies. They are profitable (tremendously profitable) and don't need them! I can't wait to hear righties defend why that is different.

The Post Office is a unique animal. Although they must be self-supporting, they are subject to regulation and oversight by the government. This has led to lobbying interests buying regulations that subsidize bulk mailings with first class postage rates. Businesses make lots of money through bulk mailing but pay pennies. Chat with your postman and see just what most of what he delivers each day consists of - junk mail! And Congress is perfectly willing to listen to those businesses and force the USPS to deliver bulk mail for next to nothing. At the same time, Congress limits the amount the Post Office can collect for 1st class mail. And let's not mention special-interest discounts, like those for political party mailings - oh, so important in this election year!

Under a 2006 law Congress forced the USPS to fund 75 years of retiree health benefits over just a 10-year span. Imagine the shrieks of outrage if Congress tried to slap FedEx or other private firms with such an onerous requirement. That law’s requirements account for 100 percent of the service’s $20 billion in losses over the previous four years. Without which the service would have turned a profit. Note that this law was passed under a Republican president with Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. Why?

Once again,Republicans manufactured a crisis. Having caused the Post Office's crisis by passing excessively burdensome legislation, they are calling for privatization (even though the Post Office has been a private enterprise, receiving no government revenue since 1970) and elimination of the postal union. That is their goal; another attempt at union-busting!

lets not forget that we have the cheapest mailing rates in the world, in norway, a first-class letter costs about 1.60 to mail

I agree 100%. I was once a federal employee and I saw first hand the waste and the power of the corrupt unions.

You do realize that UPS is unionized and it manages to control costs fine.

Yeah, I want to be a Teamster!

public sector unions are very unconstitutional, its is extortion of the citizens money from the government. remember folks that under the US constitution all coined money is owned by the citizens.

What unions are in the Civil Service. The Post Office retirement system since 1976 is now FERS system. Although there are still some civil service in the Post Office there are mostly FERS employees. The P.O. is unionized by several unions, NALC, Mail Handlers, Rural Carriers, Clerks. They are a part of the Teamsters but don't use them.

Huge Pensions are what the Post Office is all about. I hate to tell all you that know what you are talking about like huge pensions. At age 58 I recieve 900.00 a MONTH not an hour or week or 2 weeks. 900.00 a MONTH from the Post Office. Get your facts straight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

flexmind, you continue to mention you only receive $900 a month, but you do not always mention you retired after only 26 years. That is key, the 26 years, that is not all that long, most folks in the public sector will now need to work till they drop or retire after putting in their 35-45 years of working if not more. So please, you need to remember you retired right near the minimum years to qualify in your field.

Many of you folks also fail to understand that future losses in the PO will continue to increase far more then just the 5billion yearly payment. We have all seen the articles right here on MSNBC about next year losing around 14 billion and it continuing to increase.

The PO needs to cut headcount and work to increase productivity. Most all are aware of the PO union folks having excessively high injuries on the job and far more lost days due to fake injuries. Get the Union out, fill positions with part timers and focus on reducing the wages, benefit and pensions. The fact of the matter is most Walmart employees move faster, are more productive and work harder for their wages, they probably possess more skills as well.

Yeah, yeah get rid of those over paid federals workers and replace them $7.00 hr employee's who don't speak english! That will help the economy and the "middle class" who keep this economy going! Your a moron!

When the head of the postal service spends a million dollars for a house,and is crying about not being able to keep offices open,because the postal Union demanded that postal workers retirement be funded for the next 75 years, ahead of time? Congress caused this problem they need to fix it,and not by a tax payer bailout.

Whoever agreed to the 75 year funding of the Retirement AND Medical Coverage plans is who is to blame. I believe that was Congress. That is the decision that needs to be revised and/or re-negotiated to something more resonable. No sane company or institution in the US (or most likely the world) is going to fund employee programs for people that are not hired or even born yet. 75 years into the future... Really!!!!
To date the Post Office has been self funded and not used any tax payer money. They were not broken, why did they have to mess with them?
All so that Congress would have a say in which locations were closed? Not fair!

Huh? The Senate is controlled by Democrats (51 + one left-leaning independent). It's the crusty Harry Reid trumpeting this issue. Read the article.

Hmmmmm would that house be next to the CEO's of Fed Ex and UPS?

Actually the tie in of USPS and Egypt makes perfect sense. If you have any sense.

now mike, why did you have to go insult me for stating an opinion. Didn't your mother teach you Any manners?

Lori ,..about as much sense as allowing the postal union to get congress to fund the postal workers retirement for the next 75 years,congress made this deal with the postal union now they need to fix it with out tax payers dollars for a bailout.

Lori - I agree with your comment. I hate that congress is allowed to add stuff onto legislation that is totally unrelated to it. If we need another law on the books, it would be that a bill in Congress can contain details about only that one item. How many times have pork barrel projects been added to legitimate bills, just so some congressman can brag to his hometown that he got funding for his district. That type of nonsense is stupid and needs to be eliminated.

The Postal Service has been doing everything posible to cut costs and improve performance. I'm a letter carrier and I know for a fact that management has been pushing hard for productivity and that's great. I just would love to see more productivity in congress concerning the USPS. All they ever talk about is how and where please people and private interest in order to get votes and money for their campaings. They should just STOP the BS and do whatever is supposed to be done and correct the problem. This is an important matter and should be treated as such or we will lose even more jobs.

Actually, congress has been robbing the postal system for a long time... The usps was in the green for a long time until congress decided to help them get rid of all the extra money... congress as usual stealing for some other project of their own... probably another pork barrell thing like the owl vomit research...

The Post Office was founded as a means to link the people of this nation, rural and city, young and old, rich and poor. It is a service that, given its assigned duty (service to every single American , 6 days a week) , does a fine job, and is a good bang for the buck. Forty-five cents from NY to LA in 2-3 days. When is the last time you got any service for that price? The Postal Service is not selling I-Pads or electric cars. They sell service. If you have ever visited another country, you know we are spoiled Americans who enjoy the greatest Postal Service in the world. Regardless of what the young, wired up, wait for nothing generation thinks, the Postal Service is an institution worth preservation. They are a institution that takes none of your taxes to run, and touch every American every single day. Yes, the Postal Service is in financial turmoil. Drastic changes and sacrifices are on the way. Not everyone will be happy and satisfied with the decisions, but nonetheless, the play has to be called. And... its the fourth quarter.

Dummy - it isn't the Post Office that's the problem. It's the pre-funding by 75 years of the Health benefit program in a 10 year period required by a lame-duck Congress in 2006. And if you feel like driving 11 miles to a post office to have your letters or mail processed, then you can afford to pay for the gas you use. Congress created the Post Office mess and Congress can easily fix the mess they put the Post Office in.

You couldn't have made that point without being isulting, Alan?

That said, I absoultely agree that Congress created this mess and they can fix it as well.

Good day to you both.

Actually, no I couldn't have made the point without being insulting. Being termed a dummy is not an insult when it's true. Some people just don't want to look at the facts and have a bad habit of just spouting off. And to add to bmac's comment - as long as a person is healthy and able to perform the duties required of their job position, why should they retire? 65 or 66 is not a magic retirement age to push someone out the door. bmac's just not a realist.

Coming soon a special debate Romney vs Romney vs Romney, Main topic * I was against Immigration now am for it,* I was for gun control now am against it,* I was for healthcare now am against it ,* I was for cutting jobs now am for it,* I was for woman rights now am against it,* I was for saving the planet now am against it,Change is not a problem for me, am Mitt Romney!!

I can't get full retirement benefits till 70 and there are so many in the same situation. Why should people be forced to take less in retirement? Let those who can afford to volunteer to retire or let people go with full benefits.

The Republicans will only save the post office if they can get it done after November. If they can make it crash and burn before then to precipate a crisis they will. Anything to make Obama look bad.

Pissed,.. congress made this mess by dealing with the postal union to fund the postal retirement ahead of time for the next 75 years. they made the deal they can undo the deal without a tax payer bailout.

Charge the gnop one dollar for every piece of hatemail they send out at election time and the post office can give bonuses to all their hard workers.

Iowa-guy No one does a better lob of making Obama look bad but Obama himself. No one told him about the 57 states, Wanted a kid like Travyon, and the list goes on and on. Give me a break.

Are you sure you want the truth to come out, You know how politicans hate the truth?

Solved how? So we can throw billions down a hole? 3 day a week delivery, break the unions and charge .75 for first class and still give the direct mailers a discount since that is where most of the Post Offices money comes from. The post office is what would happen to EVERY GOVERNMENT agency if we had a true accounting of where our money went.

Even if repealed that is only a bit more then 5 billion a year, what about the rest of the 14billion or so they are going to lose next year as mentioned in MSNBC articles just a few months ago. The losses are piling up far faster due to reduced demand of their services. They are unsustainable at the current pace of losses, the issue could be addresses quite simply by reducing staffing accordingly(get rid of the poor performers instead of the lowest seniority, working smarter, harder and faster (it can be done, the Union just needs to get on board for once instead of fighting the changes) and implementing wage, benefit and pension cuts. Its always the same when Unions are involved, instead of all making sacrifices so no one loses a job, they have to hold their position and let their own brothers and sisters be sacrificed.

Thank you, Job1. You are officially THE ONLY person on this board that understands what the real problem is here.

Back in 1989, I was member of the Postal Union, and have personal experience with this problem. Getting rid of Saturday delivery has been a discussion since the '80's and it will only effect carriers! With the current administration talking about "redistribution of Wealth" this country is destine for destruction. The Republicans have become the "bad guys" and the current administration, along with its 'czars', have an agenda that is not good for America. It is only a matter of time before America will become nothing more than a 'third world country' !!!

It would be a bailout if the congress decided to put our tax dolars into it,instead of just undoing the 75 year prefunding of postal workers retirement,made by congress and the postal union.

It is a wonderful value; it was a wonderful value when it was still an agency of the Federal government. As many corporations as have underfunded pension plans, the PO is an absolute paragon of pension funding.

Now to the really big question: should the government take back the PO and provide part of the annual budget the way it was done for many decades, or should we start paying the real cost of mailing a letter, have businesses pay the real cost of mailing all that garbage that chokes my mail box each day, or just chuck it in and require every American to buy a computer and internet access so that we can all go to paperless billing?

The Post office is over staffed and poorly run. My father -in-law and several of his family members all worked for the post office and even they would tell you it was inefficient. They still take the cushy pensions and a lot retired early though.

Every Post Office isn't overstaffed and poorly run. My husband delivered mail for 37 years. Several other family members did too. He (as all mail carriers do) paid quite a lot into his health insurance and retirement. He had to retire at 60 because he knees finally gave out, and he certainly didn't receive a cushy pension. He started at $2.50 an hour and joined the union because working conditions were dismal, not because of the pay and benefits. The money he made was in line with a fair wage for the work he did. It is a difficult job and every mail carrier that we knew had a second job. You'll never get rich working for the Post Office. They employ thousands of veterans who are also looking for a fair wage after serving their country.

I'm a little annoyed that the article didn't give the full scope of information on this issue. The P.O. was forced to put $5.5 billion a year to fund 75 years worth of retirement. They presently have $44 billion in the retirement fund, which the P.O. says is more than enough to pay retirement benefits far into the future. Privatizing the P.O. will only benefit the rich and those who support them, and the price of a letter would be based on distance. The P.O. doesn't cost the taxpayers a penny. If you don't want to mail something--don't! Want to do everything by email?--go right ahead!

I believe the Republicans are changing their tune for the sole reason that most of the rank and file do not vote Republican. We have the greatest and most efficient mail delivery in the world for something that enormous. Leave it alone.

part of the problem is people being there 35 years. It is a job that is mostly automated and I can teach a jack russell terrior how to do it. I could get people to do that job for $10.00 an hour with no pension. I dont see the position being worth more.

Lawrenceva It is funny you mention you could get a jack russell terrior to do that job. I have been training you clowns for years to do that job and most can't handle it. I see you have tried to deliever mail. Do you take that mail to the correct address. If that mail piece do not have proper address can you still deliever that piece of mail. I do!! Do you know all of the addresses on your route and all of the last names where they live. Can you deliever all that mail every day 5 days a week for 25 years. I deliever 1 route each day a different route everyday. I deliever 5 different routes a week. Do you know all your cutomers names and addresses for all your routes. Do you fear being bitten by a Pit Bull, Dobi, Char Pei, and the list goes on and on. Until you know what the hell you are talking about don't post here. I am now retired after 26 years. NOT 35.

Wow flexmind after 25 years you remembered peoples names, Good boy, whos a good boy? You aguement of going the extra mile will fall on dead ears because most people have the exact opposite intereactions with their postal employee because somehow "Neither Rain, Nor Sleet, Nor gloom of night" turned into "we will deliver your mail if you car isnt within 20 feet of your mailbox, there is no snow on your sidewalk and you give me no reason to refuse service" The simple truth is this, if I posted an add for employment listing your duties and requirement and offered pay of $10.00 an hour I would get endless applicants. Postal workers won the blue collar lottery, stripped the system bare and now it will fail. Unions doing what they do best!

Ummm you have a computer buy your stamps online. lol

so how are you going to get your computer stamped letter from point a to point b?

Actually, Congress caused this problem by making the USPS pre-pay retirement funds and other government funds that were not needed. Our reps in congress needed a quick influx of cash for the pork barrel spending and they got it from the post office. Now the post office is dying from it and they won't own up to their own actions.

It's an affect of the union penions that all the employees want their unrealistic penions funded. I for one if I was on the dole would want it but it isn't realistic by any stretch.

I'd like to see you haul your butt out six days a week, rain or snow or shine, and do the work that these employees do. The way you talk about them is disgusting. They worked for their pensions. How about you or didn't a union have anything to do with the job rights you have, like a 40 hour work week, paid vacation time, sick leave, maternity or paternity leave. Do you think all those things came from the goodness of your employers heart? NOT. The unions won those benefits through negotiations with employers. The only reason the Post Office is in financial straits is due to, and need I say it once again. the inept idiots we elected to the inept Congress. The Postal Service receives NO taxpayer funding or is that too hard for you to understand?

As many other posters have noted, congress created the problem by requiring the post office to prepay future retirement benefits for the next 75 years and do it by 2016. That requires the post office to give the government approx. 5 Billion extra dollars a year in over payments. It has nothing to do with workers or the postal service. Got it?

My problem is with NBC news which doesn't call out the politicians and just reports babble from them

justredd64 What unrealistic pensions do YOU refer!!! Let me know how much a typical pension from the Post Office is paying. The civil service pays around 2,500 a month before taxes, health insurance, life insurance. Once all that is paid you can live on 1,800 or so a month. This is so unrealistic. How dare them to live on about 1,800 a month. Then you have someone like me that has the FERS system. In short, I recieve around 900.00 a month before taxes, insurance and the like. Those Dam union pensions.

I agree to cut off aide to Egypt's muslim brotherhood, it is wrong to the tune of 1.5B.

That is besides the point. If it is something worth doing it should not need to be snuck into some other legislation to get it passed.

I agree to that Guy but as it seems that is the current practice on BOTH sides of the aisle.

Iowa, right, the postal service does fill a need, without it how would I pay my utility bills? By going online with my bank and risking identity theft? I know folks who handle all financial transactions, like paying bills, online. Lol, it's just soooooooooo COOL Until, you get your identity stolen. Ok, online is good for sending holiday cards, etc. As for me, I'm willing to pay fifty cents for a stamp to put on my return envelope, to pay my electric bill.

I agree with your suggestions.

Isn't issueing a hunting and fishing license a state function? Maybe folks could renew their vehicle registration at the post office too, and handgun carry permit, even get a marriage license. Lol, I can hear the squalling now if that were done; Another government plan to take away our rights! More government involvement in our lives!"

You can do alot of things at the Post Office but not the handgun carry permit. That is the function of your county sherrif. Have you ever tried to carry a gun on postal property. 25,000 fine and years in jail if convicted. Thanks but no thanks.

Yeah, ok Flex. I think you missed my sarcasm when I suggested the other things besides mail service that could be done at a post office. The Postal Service should be for handling mail and nothing else. By the way, my "Carry" permit was issued by the state, not by the county.

They have been bailed out before. First by being privatized, then, when privatization didn't work "without gov't oversight", they got saddled with the extraneous rules and expenses; unions, a huge loss of business in the last 10 years and the unchanging attitude (bad) of the Post Office employees are the reason for their current and continued failure. Let's keep throwing money into that pit, to deliver nothing but garbage mail. Regardless of the position of Harry Reid (his head is usually rectally implanted) building a business model on who he knows as seniors is a LOSING proposition and unbelievably short sighted.

I recently went to get my vehicle sticker renewed and a new pair of handicapped plates for my mother, went directly to the Post office and waited 3 times as long in a 5 person line for service. The lackadaisical manner in which the customers were treated (SOP) was (and is) atrocious.

I am sure what you say is true. The real problem lies withing the union anyway.

The postal unions (there are 4 that represent the workers) had nothing to do with passing the prefunding law. In fact, all 4 unions, together with all 3 management associations, have lobbied Congress ever since to repeal this legislation. I know because I went to Washington, D.C., in 2007 and 2008, as part of a postmaster's delegation to lobby Congress myself! So get your facts straight, stormerF, it was the Congress. We grow tired of whining about the "awful" unions, when if it weren't for organized labor, you wouldn't enjoy many of the benefits you have today, such as a 40 hour work week, with OT pay, sick pay, vacation pay, health benefits, lunch periods, safety rules, and other protections gained by labor over the years. You should keep those historical gains in mind.

Jenny, I am so happy to read an intelligent persons writings instead of union bashers who know nothing about the financial problems created by congress. Thank you.

why do we need all the top brass at each post office,wouldnt it make more sense to make county or some type of district postmaster, what the postal service needs is more workers and less worthless brass!!!!

Doug Bair: You are dilutional1

mr doug bair, you sound like one of the idiots that helped put the illegal muslim into my whitehouse, if he is reelected, you idiots will deserve the distruction of this country that you so richly deserve...

In rural areas? Really? They've already closed two near me in central San Diego. Never though of that as "rural".

To retired police officer-1789561

Wrong! There needs to be less workers and less brass, and also less post offices. There needs to be less pay and a 401k type retirement plan, like most of us have, But being a retired police officer, you wouldn't like that, being a primary feeder at the public through.

Anyone who calls a police officer a "feeder at the public trough" (please note the spelling) is either (1) a felon or (2) ignoramus. Which are you?

By the way, instead of screaming about decent pensions, why don't you work to bring decent pensions to those with 401Ks. Many of them USED to have good pensions.

Dahly-1755482 If we let the Post Office fail are you going to be around to hire one of the 535,000 employees of the Postal Service who will be out of work. Great Plan!! What free market can fill that void. We have now thousands out of work without the hope of finding a job. I have a better Plan only just like yours. Kill em All, Let GOD sort em out. I have the Tee to prove it. See just as stupid.

Blanca Pez We do pay into a 401 type. It is called TSP, and SSAN. Get your facts straight

Blanca Pez How much to you think a Postal Carrier gets paid. However much YOU are wrong!!! Most Postal Carriers pay into a 401 type fund. It is callled TSP. They also pay into SS. and pay into a retirement fund. it is a small amount but better than nothing. Get your facts straight.

retired police officer (#24.3) Sigh,,,, another birther, and you threw the Muslim thing into as well. The ignorance of the right knows no bounds.

BTW, it's not YOUR White House, it's OUR White house and the majority of us voted to put Obama in there and if God smiles on our nation this fall we'll keep him there. He's got some issues, but he's head and shoulders above anyone running against him.

On the subject of the Post Office, any sane person should realize that we need to make cuts. But the biggest item is to get rid of that 75 year funding mandate.

You're right. No Democrat would dare live in a rural area. Too far to walk to the welfare office.

Those are facts, They don't listen to them in Congress don't ya know!

If the Post Office closed all of its facilities in unprofitable locations, it would not have any financial issues for a long time. Unfortunately, those unprofitable locations are where the teabaggers are.

No, this is a perfect example of why our federal government is broken. The PO would be running in the black, if republican politics forcing it to pay for 75 years of pensions in 10 years were not in effect. This was the parting gift of a lame duck republican congress, which the voters had already replaced with a democratic congress.

How can you fix a problem if you can't see where it came from?

The PO was subsidized until the early 1980's. And though the bill to pay for 75 year of pensions in 10 may be a factor, the truth is that the decline in revenue it receives has caused the real issue -Revenue in the 2000s has been dropping sharply due to declining mail volume, prompting the postal service to look to other sources of revenue while cutting costs to reduce its budget deficit.

In the real world, they should reorganize based on projected income. But as an agency authorized by the United States Constitution, it doesn't live in the real world.

The problem is reduced revenue.

Also the Post Offices closed in rural areas would be replaced by kiosks in local grocery stores. Better operating hours would be a plus.

"May be a factor"? Come on. The problem may one day be reduced revenue. But the problem right now is the legislation which requires it to start each year $5B in the hole. Whatever else you'd like to argue, the fact remains that without that legislation, the USPS is running in the black, and requires no taxpayer bailout or other congressional action. Talking about other issues is really jumping the gun. I don't know how to reorganize the USPS, and you probably don't either. We could let the PMG do his job, and see how it goes. He seems to think he can pull it off.