Pete Sessions (00:00):
It is on the post office. For each year, the Postal Service loses billions of dollars. And now we know that in 12 months they will run out in cash. We have been engaging, both Mr. Mfume and I and this subcommittee, with the Postmaster General for quite some time about the meaning of that and how we might address those issues.
(00:29)
The last Postmaster, Louis DeJoy, launched his Delivering for America Plan, which was designed to revive the Postal Service. And unfortunately, those expectations were not reached. Mr. Steiner now has taken that new role as our new Postmaster General. Congratulations, and thank you for being here, Mr. Steiner. A role that is very focused on taking on full advantage of the last-mile capacity to grow revenue, raising revenue, cutting cost, and utilizing the capacities and capabilities of private industry we believe will be the path forward.
(01:10)
Understanding which aspects of Delivering for America Plan will remain and which have been stopped is a key path to that as we move forward. Without proper transparency and override, Congress will be unable to see whether action and further action is necessary, and that is why we are also here today. And with the Postal Service's request for increase in borrowing authority from the treasury, Congress needs to have confidence not only that they'll be able to pay it back, but that they're on the right road to achieve financial security.
(01:49)
For Congress to consider this request, the Postal Service must also prove that they have exhausted their options already. And this is a part of the regular interaction that takes place between this subcommittee as well as our staff and the Postmaster General and his staff as they work through the needs of understanding the ideas and where they meet with revenue objectives.
(02:18)
Like so many actions that are available to the Postal Service, they need to look at them and understand what those ramifications mean. And while we have been in dialogue over those, some of those have taken place, and we look forward today to hearing about those outcomes and answers.
(02:37)
I'm delighted to be here today. I think Mr. Mfume and I both wake up, as Mr. Steiner does, at 3:00 some mornings with this on our mind. But I would also say that many of our other members do that also as well. The huge industry that surrounds this, it is a very important competitive marketplace. It is a very important part of the American economy and the vibrancy of this country, but we also come at this as members of Congress from our opportunity to serve people back home who want and need the Postal Service to be viable, but to be cost-effective also. All of these things come to point today, another day, where we're able to have the Postmaster General, and I'm delighted that he is here. I would like to yield now the time to the gentleman, distinguished gentleman, my good friend, and a gentleman who I think he and I both share many of the same ideas, not only about America's bright future, but about our responsibility and oversight. Distinguished gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
Kweisi Mfume (03:54):
Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for those kind and gracious remarks. I'm glad that we are here together one more time and here to discuss what we consider and many out there who are watching us consider to be a vital issue. I want to welcome also the Postmaster General, Mr. Steiner. Good to see you again. And Mr. Marroni, I hope that we can have a productive conversation today on how to put the Postal Service back on the right track for delivering for the American people.
(04:31)
As we all know, for more than 250 years, our Postal Service has performed an indispensable service to this country and its citizens. Through its universal service obligation, the Postal Service knits together communities. It powers businesses and bridges geographic and economic and cultural divides. Americans in every part of this country rely upon and really deserve prompt, reliable, and efficient mail services.
(05:06)
I have unfortunately been alarmed over the last 15 months to see, in many respects, efforts to politicize the process as we know it. President Trump unfortunately has threatened to do everything from merging the Postal Service with the Department of Commerce to firing an entire board of governors. And former Postmaster General DeJoy left his position prematurely last year under pressure from the White House after he refused to grant DOGE officials access to Postal Service systems.
(05:44)
Moving forward, I would urge you, Mr. Postmaster General, to continue defending against any threat that's brought up that would and somehow or another undercut the independence of the Postal Service. And many of my colleagues have also watched with a great concern in recent years as the financial condition has deteriorated and service standards in the eyes of some people have fallen. The last thing that we want is a privatized system. And I would hope that every time we meet those efforts by those who argue that privatization is the way to go, that we are steadfast and firm in resisting that.
(06:29)
Putting the Postal Service back on a financial and secure footing is key. And since July of 2021, First-Class Mail costs have increased 41%, while delivery standards were lengthened from two to five days to now three. Well, two to three days to now three to five days. That means that Americans have to pay higher prices for a service that is not as good as it was. Last year, Postmaster General Steiner, you met with members of this subcommittee to share your plans for stabilizing the Postal Services' finances. We thank you for that. Since then, however, the Postal Service has continued, unfortunately, to lose money at an alarming rate, while performance has continued to suffer.
(07:20)
In fiscal year 2025, the Postal Service suffered a net loss of $9 billion. It's been well reported. We're all familiar with that figure with a further $1.3 billion loss in the first quarter of this year alone. The Postal Service is approaching a liquidity crisis indeed. Without significant reforms, it will not have enough cash on hand to meet its required payments as early as 2027.
(07:49)
For the good of all Americans who rely on the Postal Service for critical mail, medicine, ballots, et cetera, we cannot allow that to happen in the Postal Service. Obviously needs to cut cost and increase revenue. I appreciate the Postmaster General's effort to do so over the last year or so, but this is not an easy matter at all. It's a hell of a juggling act, to say the very, very least.
(08:16)
I want to make sure that we in this committee and those who are watching this, who are concerned about the Postal Service, find a way to realize a couple of things. In addition to cutting cost and increasing revenue, there are, indeed, morale issues that have to be confronted also because some people grew up in the mail service believing it to be one way, and look at it today and figure out whether or not they have a role in it.
(08:50)
Most concerningly, the president has continued baseless attacks, I think, on the legitimacy of the Democratic process, threatening to deprive, and I'm going somewhere with this, millions of Americans by doing away with or eliminating mail-in ballots and punishing states that refuse to comply. And that is why Chairman Sessions, myself, other members of this committee on both sides of the aisle introduced the Bipartisan Vote by Mail Tracking Act which would also standardize UPS tracking barcodes to every ballot that's mailed in, giving voters realtime visibility into whether or not their ballot has been received and/or processed. And because we all agree, I believe, that the vote and the ability to vote is a sacred American right, any effort to abridge that right goes against virtually everything that we stand for as a nation.
(09:49)
Moving forward, I have every confidence, Mr. Postmaster General, that you and the workforce that you've assembled and the one that you've inherited will all work in this election year to ensure that every ballot is delivered and every vote is counted. And I want to take the time to recognize the incredible work of the postal workforce that the chairman alluded to earlier. They continue to do for the American people a great service, and they do it in a way that they don't complain. We all remember what happened in the last election season when they were faced with the insurmountable task, as some thought at the time, to be able to sort the mail, deliver the mail, and guarantee the mail, and yet they did that. And only weeks after that, ran into an avalanche of different challenges posed by the overwhelming load of holiday mail, and they did that back to back.
(10:45)
Regrettably, however, letter carriers across this country are increasingly the subjects of violence by criminals. We've spoken about this before. We all share this concern. Criminals target locked mailboxes that are only accessible to the United States Public Service. I've seen postal workers beaten and stabbed and left to fend for their own while help comes up. We've seen the videos all over YouTube on that. No Postal Service workers should fear for their safety at work, and that's why I've pushed for the implementation of the Postal Services Joint Protection Safe Delivery Initiative. I know it sounds like a lot, but it does a lot, and it's designed to do that as we try to provide a way to make sure that there's safety that goes with this job and all the attendant positions and industries that are a part of it.
(11:40)
Now, one final thing. I'm going to yield back to the chairman who's very, very generous with this time. We are in a situation where we cannot lose the Postal Service as we know it. We all agree on that, I think. The question becomes, how do we find a way to fight back against those efforts and those persons that don't necessarily believe it? And it is an all-hands-on-deck kind of an issue where, whether you're in the field, whether you're in the building, whether you're at headquarters, or whether you are doing something else related to the mail, this means all of us sort of ... And by the way, and whether it means you're sitting on one of these committees of oversight, it means that all of us have to find a way to put aside any differences and to recognize that, if we don't all go forward, we will all go backwards.
(12:33)
It's been a pleasure working with this chairman who shares many of my ideas, and I share many of his on this. We've tried to approach this as a bipartisan effort and have left out, to the extent we can, anything that sometimes creeps in as partisan because, at the end of the day, it's the service and the people who deserve the service more than anything else that we're all assembled here for. I thank you again for your generosity of time, Mr. Chairman, and for working together on this issue as we have for years now. I never thought I'd say we've been doing it for years, but we have been. And I yield back my time.
Pete Sessions (13:12):
I thank the gentleman, Mr. Mfume, for his conversation. I believe that I will take it succinctly down to the point that he and I overwhelmingly agree with, and that is we have to keep the issues directly in front of us. We have to work on them. We have to understand them. We have to deal with them, and I could not have a better partner to do that with than you, sir. Although, I will say, over time, you look better, and I look older.
(13:43)
Without objection, we are going to welcome our young chairman, James Comer, who is here. Chairman of the full committee. We also welcome Congressman Timmons from South Carolina, Congressman Boebert from Colorado, Congress Walkinshaw of Virginia, Congressman Tlaib of Michigan, Congressman Budzinski of Illinois, and Congressman Bell of Missouri. I'm sorry. I'm supposed to say Missouri. I used to live in Missouri, but they like to call it Missouri. They're all waived on the subcommittee for the purpose of questioning the witness at today's subcommittee hearing. Thank you very much.
(14:25)
We now would move to the reason why we're here, and I'm pleased to welcome our witnesses for today. Mr. Steiner is the Postmaster General and Chief Executive Officer of the United States Postal Service, having held this position since July of 2025. Prior to this, he was the CEO of Waste Management and on the board of directors of FedEx.
(14:51)
Our second witness today is Mr. Marroni. He is director of physical infrastructure at the government accounting office. The GAO is expert in many areas, and he will soon prove his worthiness today. He is an expert in the Postal Service and Federal Real Property Management, so I look forward to both of you not only being here for your testimony but answering the questions. I would ask that both of you now stand for you to be sworn in before this subcommittee.
(15:23)
Pursuant to committee rule 9G, the witnesses will please raise their hand, which they have done, and their right hand is raised, and I will ask the question, do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Let the record reflect that both witnesses have answered in the affirmative. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
(15:50)
I would now like for you to know that we normally follow this five-minute rule, but what I'm interested today, and I've informed the gentlewoman, the chairman of the rules committee. She will take the time that she needs. You have drawn a lot of people who will come today. Not everybody's here right now, but you have drawn this, and I'm interested in us members and you giving an opportunity to fully vet your answer and to be given that time. And if you exceed that, I'll let you know.
(16:22)
I now would recognize the gentleman, the Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service, the gentleman, Mr. Steiner, for his opening statement.
David Steiner (16:32):
Thank you Member Mfume, Chairman Comer, and members.
(16:38)
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss how the Postal Service is at a critical juncture. At our current rate, we'll be out of cash in less than 12 months. In about a year from now, the Postal Service would be unable to deliver the mail if we continue the status quo. For perspective, if all of that lost volume was paid at the current price of a stamp, which is 78 cents, that's about $81 a year.
(17:05)
Second, we can't borrow more than $15 billion. The $15 billion limit was established decades ago. If you applied inflation or based it on revenue, that limit should be $30 to $40 billion.
(17:18)
Third, we can only invest our retirement in treasury notes. If we were able to invest conservatively, we would have an additional $800 billion in retirement benefits. Fourth, we're mandated by law to deliver to every address, more than 170 million of them, six days a week. This leads to 71% of our delivery routes being financially underwater. If we're expected to deliver six days a week to every location, someone needs to pay for that.
(17:48)
Fifth, we're not allowed to manage our own workers' compensation claims. That costs us anywhere from $400 million to $800 million per year.
(17:58)
Next, we're regulated like a monopoly, but we no longer exist as one. In fact, we're regulated worse than a monopoly because even a monopoly is allowed to make money. Our regulator causes us to lose billions annually. Just recently, they passed an order that, by their own estimate, could lose us nearly $1 billion a year. Clearly, they're not following their mandate to make the Postal Service financially viable.
(18:29)
And there are other parts to the anchor. Transporting cargo to remote parts of the US costs us about $150 million. Keeping post offices open and not being allowed to consider losses as a reason to replace them with alternative means is another $840 million. And the list goes on.
(18:51)
On pricing, we need higher prices on both our package and mail products. At 78 cents, the US First-Class stamp is the lowest in the industrialized world. Compare it to France at almost $3 and England at $2.50. And the longest distance those letters have to travel is about 600 miles, smaller than the state of Texas. We deliver from the tip of Puerto Rico to the tip of Alaska for 78 cents. That's a distance of 5,000 miles. We sell the stamp at less than half the cost to travel eight times farther. If we were to change the stamp price to 90 to 95 cents, which is still less than half of the cost of foreign posts, that would largely solve our controllable loss. And the stamp would still be the lowest in the industrialized world by a lot.
(19:46)
And on the cost side, the Postal Service has undertaken a transformation of our network and operating practices to reduce costs. We know that our execution should have been much better and that we've not achieved all the savings that we initially projected, but we can do more. We will continue to reduce costs wherever we can, and I've asked our team to develop a plan to further reduce costs.
(20:10)
I'm here to tell America that we can do anything you want. We've been doing exactly that for over 250 years. If you want the same number of delivery days and post offices, we can do that, but someone has to pay for it. If you want to have a discussion about reducing services, we can do that too. But there's one thing we can't do. And that is the status quo. And we don't have a lot of time.
(20:36)
One easy action, increasing our borrowing authority, buys us time, time that we can use to best determine what the Postal Service should do to best serve the American public. We stand ready to continue serving all Americans. We just ask that you take away the anchors and let us operate like a truly independent agency, free from requirements that weigh us down, or that you compensate us for the cost of those anchors. If we can do either of those, I can promise unparalleled service for the next 250 years.
(21:12)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Pete Sessions (21:15):
Thank you very much, Postmaster General. [inaudible 00:21:16].
David Marroni (21:22):
Thank you, Chairman Sessions, Ranking Member Mfume, and members of the subcommittee. I'm pleased to be here today to discuss the future of the United States Postal Service.
(21:31)
GAO has been making the case for more than 15 years that USPS's finances are a high-risk issue in need of substantial transformation. Rising costs and declining mail volumes have made USPS's existing business model unsustainable. As a result, it has accumulated billions of dollars in net losses as its debt and unfunded liabilities have continued to grow. We are now at a critical moment with the Postmaster General stating that USPS could run out cash as early as next year. Urgent action is needed to get ahead of any near-term cash crisis while also putting USPS on a sustainable long-term path. Without action, there could be substantial consequences for American households and businesses that rely on USPS's services.
(22:19)
In short, it's time for Congress to fix USPS's outdated business model. This will require making difficult choices with significant trade-offs. There are no easy solutions. However, it is better to make those choices now rather than wait until crisis hits.
(22:37)
To be clear, USPS and Congress have taken significant actions in the past five years. USPS has implemented a wide-ranging 10-year plan with the aim of fixing its finances, and Congress has passed major postal legislation to provide financial relief. However, those actions have not been enough. While USPS has been able to increase its revenue and cut some costs, its overall expenses have grown at a faster rate, while its service performance has declined. This pattern is not sustainable. There is a fundamental tension between the level of services that Congress expects USPS to provide and the revenue that USPS can reasonably be expected to generate. Something has to change.
(23:20)
For its part, USPS needs to take additional actions within its own authority to try and improve its financial situation. This includes considering changes to its current 10-year plan and identifying ways to increase its revenues while tackling cost growth. As it does so, USPS should develop long-term financial projections that will help communicate its outlook and progress to Congress and identify actions to help put it on a financially viable path. That said, it is highly unlikely that USPS will be able to fix its poor financial condition on its own. Congress will need to act.
(23:58)
Indeed, Congress may need to provide some short- time financial relief to help USPS avoid running out of cash. At the same time, it's essential that Congress also address the long-term issues with USPS's business model. If those underlying issues aren't addressed now, USPS will likely continue to struggle financially, and its service performance may decline further. Indeed, within five years, USPS will be responsible for an additional $6 billion a year in retiree healthcare costs on top of other expenses that are likely to continue to grow. To fix USPS's business model for the long term, Congress will need to decide on the level of Postal Service the nation requires and determine a balanced approach to funding those services.
(24:43)
In conclusion, USPS has been struggling financially for years and is now approaching a crisis point. It is imperative that USPS and Congress act with urgency to both address the near-term cash crisis as well as fix USPS's business model for the long term. There are difficult choices ahead, but those choices need to be made now to put USPS on a sustainable financial path. A financially viable USPS will best be able to provide high-quality service to the American people.
(25:14)
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening statement. I'll be happy to answer any questions.
Pete Sessions (25:20):
Thank you very much. Obviously, your insight from both of you will be available to this subcommittee, and I appreciate that. I would move first, does the distinguished gentleman, the chairman of the committee, wish time, gentleman, Mr. Comer?
(25:41)
Then sounds like the gentleman is going to be here for a little bit. I would move to the distinguished gentlewoman.
(25:49)
You do want to go now?
James Comer (25:50):
I thought [inaudible 00:25:51].
Pete Sessions (25:51):
No, I'm sorry.
James Comer (25:52):
I'm sorry. I apologize.
Pete Sessions (25:53):
[inaudible 00:25:53] time.
James Comer (25:53):
And Mr. Chairman, thank you and the ranking member for always having quality meetings. Mr. Postmaster General, welcome. I have three questions I'm going to try to get in in my five minutes. I want to start with a report, the Office of Inspector General, regarding waste in the Postal Service USPS Ship program, a topic that is of significant concern to this committee.
(26:19)
The OIG found that the Postal Service has spent over $1.5 billion developing this Ship program, and it's something that the private sector already has. The private sector already offers. The program wasted billions. The OIG recommended ending it. Your chief financial officer agreed to end it, but it has not ended.
(26:43)
First, do you agree that the USPS should not spend billions recreating programs that the private sector already offers at a fraction of the cost?
David Steiner (26:53):
I mean, that's a great question. From our perspective, we want to give the customer the best experience. And generally, I would say giving the customer the best experience is dealing directly with our customers, but we have looked at situations where we would have others between us and our customers to do that type of technology work. We're actually looking at it right now.
James Comer (27:15):
And then I apologize for interrupting, but I have limited time. Will you or will you not commit to ending this program immediately? I mean, that's part of what we're all concerned about, at least on this side of the aisle, is the losses. We want to protect the-
David Steiner (27:32):
Of course.
James Comer (27:32):
... Postal Service, but we've got to make some business decisions.
David Steiner (27:35):
No doubt about it. And I will tell you, Mr. Chairman, that we have not made a final decision on that, but I appreciate the question. We'll make sure to get you a final decision on that posthaste.
James Comer (27:47):
Well, let's talk about the Postal Service Reform Act. That worked very closely. When I was ranking member within Chairman Maloney, and that was a true bipartisan bill because there's bipartisan support for the Postal Service. One of the things that we expected when we gave the Postal Service some money to stabilize the books ... Everything that you're talking about today, we did five years ago.
(28:15)
What cost-cutting measures has the USPS implemented since the Postal Service Reform Act passed and became law?
David Steiner (28:25):
Sure. As you're well aware, we transformed the network. We basically went to a typical hub-and-spoke network, something that's been around for hundreds of years, been used by every logistics company since 1955. Going to that network, we reduced transportation costs. We reduced number of times that we move boxes. That does-
James Comer (28:47):
Did that reduce costs?
David Steiner (28:48):
That has reduced costs by about $2.1, $2.2 billion.
James Comer (28:53):
Well, according to-
David Steiner (28:56):
I remember our original projection was 3.6, so we aren't there yet.
James Comer (29:01):
Based on the numbers, it looks to me like nearly 80% of the US Postal Services' cost are labor, which is the case with just about every government agency. The biggest expense in your entire budget is personnel. And most federal agencies today have hiring freezes.
(29:21)
Why would that not be something you would be looking at to reduce costs instead of asking Congress for a bailout?
David Steiner (29:31):
We're absolutely looking at that. Now, remember there's two pieces to our network. There's folks that actually deliver the mail. And you don't want to do a hiring freeze there because, if we do that, then we won't deliver mail. From a management perspective, we have not increased the number of our employees dramatically, but as you know, we've brought in the-
James Comer (29:53):
But they've increased, and every other government agency's decreasing the numbers.
David Steiner (29:58):
Well, actually-
James Comer (29:58):
Just like their most private sector.
David Steiner (29:59):
Actually, in the last four years, we have about 30, 35,000 fewer employees. And we're moving toward more of those employees being pre-career rather than career. There's two ways we can really save money here. That's changing our mix of career and non-career more toward non-career-
James Comer (30:17):
Talking about part-time and full-time, right?
David Steiner (30:18):
Correct. Basically. And the other is overtime. Both regular overtime, penalty overtime. Those are $100 to $150 million for every percentage point you move them. That's where we're focused. But you're absolutely right. We have to look at everything. We can't look at just one piece.
James Comer (30:37):
And look, we support the postal workers. My grandmother delivered the mail. She spent 27 years as a mail carrier in Red Boiling Springs, Tennessee. I support the post office. Very popular in my district, but people are frustrated with the post office. We all have horror stories from the Postal Service. But what's frustrating to me, and I think many members on this committee, is
James Comer (31:00):
... is that it seems like we're trying to do more in the Postal Service in-house instead of privatizing. Even before the Postal Reform Act passed a few years ago, you privatized a lot of the logistics and things like that, that it appears now the Postal Service is trying to do itself. And it's hard for me to believe as much trouble as the Postal Service at delivering the mail on time efficiently that anyone would believe the Postal Service run by the government can operate cheaper than private companies that have been contracted with the Postal Service for years.
(31:42)
And we're ... Or I'll speak for myself, I'm frustrated that a lot of private companies that have been doing business with the Postal Service for years have been cut out in the last year or two.
David Steiner (31:53):
Yeah. I'm not sure which part of the network you're referring to. The only thing that we've really insourced in the last year is our local transportation network, and we've started to insource that. I will tell you, any time I can do something better cheaper, we're going to do it, and that's one area-
James Comer (32:10):
It's hard for me to believe you're doing it cheaper from the Postal Service. You've done that, and you're asking for more money. It's just hard to believe. Maybe it's true, but it's hard for me to believe, being in Congress nine and a half years.
David Steiner (32:21):
Well, if you believe our accountants, it's true. There's about-
James Comer (32:24):
I don't know-
David Steiner (32:24):
... 44-
James Comer (32:25):
... if they work for the government, I have to think about that.
David Steiner (32:28):
There's about $44 million that we've saved by insourcing that. But even more importantly, it helps service. So, when we use third parties we have to call them, take some time to get there, sometimes they'll show, sometimes they won't. When we have our own folks onsite with the trucks, they can move immediately.
(32:45)
So, what we get is better service at a cheaper cost. Now that's not to say that there's not plenty that we don't do well, but that is one thing we're doing pretty well.
James Comer (32:55):
Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. I yield back.
Pete Sessions (32:59):
The gentleman yields back his time. The gentleman Mr. Mfume is recognized.
Kweisi Mfume (33:05):
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, again. Mr. Postmaster General, I took some notes with what you were saying, and I have a couple of observations, and maybe you can point me in the direction where you think you should be going.
(33:20)
Aside from that, there's an old saying that says, "The hurriedier I go, the behinder I get." And we have been rushing through this committee for the last several years emphatically trying to find a way to avoid the crisis that's in front of us now. And we look up, and behinder we are.
(33:39)
So, your points, if I have them correctly, was that you don't have the ability to manage your worker compensation plans. Is that correct?
David Steiner (33:49):
That's one of them. Yes.
Kweisi Mfume (33:50):
That you've lost $81 billion in real time over an accumulated number of years as a result of a reduction in the volume of mail in the United States. Is that correct?
David Steiner (34:02):
Well, we lost 104 billion pieces. I was just using the 78 cent stamp for illustrative purposes, but-
Kweisi Mfume (34:11):
Okay.
David Steiner (34:11):
... yeah. So, that would be-
Kweisi Mfume (34:11):
And the other point you were making-
David Steiner (34:12):
... $81 billion.
Kweisi Mfume (34:12):
... is that, unlike other places, you're required to transport to remote places across the United States. Is that correct?
David Steiner (34:20):
That's correct.
Kweisi Mfume (34:21):
And that you said that the 78 cent stamp is the lowest out of all industrialized countries, and that it travels fewer miles for it to be taken advantage of or deliver, I should say, the mail. Is that correct?
David Steiner (34:36):
That's correct.
Kweisi Mfume (34:39):
This is a situation that Mr. Marroni mentioned earlier about the GAO strongly recommending, aside from Congressional assistance, in terms of money, that the Postal Service do everything that it can within its power to drive back the cost, and to get out of the situation we're in. Mr. Marroni, is that correct?
David Marroni (35:06):
Yes. That's correct.
Kweisi Mfume (35:06):
And what would some of those things be?
David Marroni (35:10):
So, they're ways to get compensation under control, that's a major area of cost growth. They would be continuing to find ways to get costs out of transportation, out of the network process. There are steps that USPS has been taking to get those costs under control, but you have the fundamental issue of volumes declining while the amount of places the USPS has to deliver are increasing. So, there's a fundamental disconnect there that's driving up costs.
Kweisi Mfume (35:32):
And I'm sure Benjamin ... Well, we won't call his name here today, because I'm sure he's probably spinning in his grave looking at this, but the first Postmaster General could not anticipate FedEx, Amazon, UPS, but you're faced with those as a competing force. Can you take a quick minute and tell us whether or not you have any ability to control those costs? Or losses, I should say.
David Steiner (35:59):
In what regard?
Kweisi Mfume (36:00):
Well, what are you doing with your competition? Who, clearly, wants to do all that it can to take away your business.
David Steiner (36:07):
Yeah. A great question. Look, the reality is until the recent changes to the network, we didn't have a network that could even compete with FedEx, and UPS, and Amazon. It just couldn't compete.
(36:18)
And so, what we've designed now is a network that can compete. But it competes at the lower level. So, just to give you an example, our average weight of our package is about one to 1. 2 pounds. FedEx, UPS, they're closer to five pounds. And as you move up in weight, you move up in value. And so, you move up in profitability.
(36:39)
So, our network was designed for lower weight packages. We need to move that up. We need to go after those higher value packages. But we also need to continue to get those lower value packages.
(36:49)
And then in that lower value package market, what you've seen is a dramatic change in how that market is being served. What do I mean by that? The gig economy. So, you've got very low cost providers coming from foreign countries, being subsidized by foreign governments coming in, and selling transportation at below cost, so, that they can-
Kweisi Mfume (37:14):
I got it. I'm going to have to reclaim my time. It's very limited, and maybe you'll get a chance to respond to another member's question on that subject. But let me just go back to the point I initially made that Mr. Marroni said, short of everything that's being proposed as stopgap measures that UPS should be doing everything it can under its authority to reduce costs. Can you tell us what that is? I want to follow up on the chairman's question on that, and, specifically, tell us how those costs have been reduced, Mr. Postmaster.
David Steiner (37:47):
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were talking to the other David. So, obviously, we put together a network that reduces number of trips, reduces transportation costs, reduces fuel costs. As I said, it's a hub and spoke network. It's been proven to work since it was invented in 1955 by Delta Airlines. Every major logistics company uses it.
(38:08)
But there is a difference between building a network and operating a network. And we've built the network. We're close to done building the network. We have yet to fully really learn how to operate the network, and that's where the savings start to come is when you learn how to operate the network.
(38:25)
What you've seen is that the pace of savings has increased, and the pace of service has gotten better.
Kweisi Mfume (38:33):
Thank you, sir. My time has expired, though. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Pete Sessions (38:36):
The gentleman yields back his time. The distinguished gentlewoman, chairman of the Rules Committee, Miss Foxx is recognized.
Virginia Foxx (38:42):
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I thank our witnesses for being here, and I want to say that I particularly join Mr. Mfume and you, Mr. Chairman, in thanking the local postal workers for their work.
(38:58)
I'm a lifelong letter writer, and always used the Post Office. But I am very concerned with the caliber of service that we are getting, and with the fact that the Post Office continues to come to us for more money.
(39:13)
I mailed my husband a Valentine a week before Valentine's Day. He still hasn't received it. People in my office know people who have sent out wedding invitations, mailed in plenty of time, people haven't received them a month later.
(39:31)
This is unacceptable, Mr. Postmaster General. Absolutely unacceptable. If you want people to stop not using the Post Office, you want them to continue to use the Post Office, then they have to get the kind of service that they deserve, and have had in the past.
(39:52)
Now we were told the Delivering for America Plan was a longtime strategy to study Postal Service finances, improve operations, and protect the future of the mail system, but the UPS losses continue, productivity has declined, Americans get repeated rate increases, slower services. I was a big part of the Postal Service Reform Act also in 2022.
(40:22)
So, given what's going on, the very negative things that are happening, what evidence suggests the current plan is working? I heard what you just said, and why should Congress expect different results, if the DFA plan continues?
David Steiner (40:39):
Yeah. I couldn't agree with you more on the service issue. We absolutely have to do a better job with what we call the tale of the mail, the wedding invitation that shows up late, the Valentine's Day card that doesn't get there on time.
(40:53)
This is an unbelievably complicated network. Just to give you perspective, FedEx and UPS both deliver well under 10 billion packages a year. Well under 10 billion. We deliver 110 billion pieces per year. And so, this network is so much more sophisticated than those networks, because of mail.
(41:14)
And so, there are hundreds of pinch points where there can be problems. It goes back to what I said earlier. You can build a network, but you've got to learn how to operate the network. And I will tell you, we are not great at operating the network.
(41:28)
We've put Doug Tulino in charge of that, making sure that all three of our pieces that do delivery are joined together and working together. And you've started to see progress. You've started to see some very good progress and service. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that we're there yet.
Virginia Foxx (41:45):
So, can we expect modifications to the plan, and better service? Mr. Marroni said that you have controllable costs, but you didn't give us any specifics. We know that if you could reduce controllable costs by, roughly, 2% per year, you'd put the Postal Service on a path to break even. Given that possibility, what specific steps is USPS taking to reduce controllable costs?
David Steiner (42:18):
Well, we've got to look at controllable costs everywhere. So, we talked about it in the network. You've got fuel costs. Of course, you're going to see those disappear, as we've seen the price of fuel go up. You've got labor costs. You've seen our work hours come down by over 50 million work hours.
(42:33)
Now we need to make sure that those work hours are straight time hours, not overtime hours. And we need to make sure that our complement moves more toward pre-career than career. We still have a lot of room to grow there. So, there's a lot of dollars to be saved right there.
(42:50)
And the rest of the money is going to come by us learning how to operate the network better, but let me make it very, very, very, very clear we are not going to save our way out of the hole that we're in. I know that the prior plan said, "Break even in 2023," not going to happen. Didn't happen. And I don't expect to see it happen any time soon on the current path that we are on. Why is that? Because inflation keeps eating up our savings.
Virginia Foxx (43:19):
I'd like to follow up on a question from Chairman Comer also about duplicative insourcing done. I think many of us share the concern that there's a way to contract out a lot of services, but you keep bringing those things back inside, and it's costing more, because of the overtime, and the number of people that you have there working. So, please say a little bit more about what you can do not to have this insourcing going on.
David Steiner (43:50):
Yeah. As far as I know, there's only one thing we insourced, and, again, that's local transportation. And those costs, I said, down $44 million. That's 17%. There's a 17% savings in that cost of local transportation. Not only is there 17% savings, but we get better service. I think that's a win-win.
(44:11)
I'm not going to tell you that's going to solve the problem. $44 million doesn't get you there, but that's one instance where I would tell you we made the right business decision.
Virginia Foxx (44:20):
Mr. Chairman, thank you for your indulgence. I yield back.
Pete Sessions (44:23):
Thank you very much. Appreciate the gentlewoman taking time. I know that these are important issues to her, and she catches me on a regular basis, and I appreciate her taking time here. The gentlewoman Miss Norton is recognized.
Eleanor Norton (44:41):
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to begin by thanking Postal Service employees for their dedication and hard work. Postal General, District of Columbia residents have brought to my attention that their local Post Offices are often closed during normal business hours. That is unacceptable. I request that you examine this matter, and report back to me within 30 days on how you will fix it.
(45:20)
At a time when more and more Americans are struggling to cover the costs of basic goods and services, increased Postal Service prices are especially hard to accept. Millions of people across the country rely on the Postal Service to pay their bills, file their taxes, run their businesses, and fully participate in our society.
(45:49)
Since July 2021, First-Class mail rates have increased by nearly 42%. At the same time, the delivery standards have been lengthened from two to three days to three to five days. Postal General, can you commit that the costs of the Postal Service's financial situation will not be disproportionately borne by customers via increased prices and lower delivery standards?
David Steiner (46:34):
Yeah. Look, we are still, by far, the lowest priced stamp in the industrialized world. Every industrialized country has dealt with this issue, and they've had to triple, quadruple prices.
(46:50)
You talked about the 42% price increase. That's because we were at such a low base relative to the rest of the world. Six of the last 12 price increases have been under 2%. And so, I am a firm believer that the market should set the rate, and the market is not setting the rate right now.
(47:08)
And the other thing I would say is, look, we're all users of the Postal Service. If we raise the stamp by a price of 15 cents, someone that uses 100 stamps a year, that costs them a dollar and a half. If you're a super user, and you used 1000 stamps a year, it costs you $150. Is that worth saving the Postal Service?
Eleanor Norton (47:40):
Mr. Marroni, what changes can be made to Postal Service operations to put the Postal Service back to a secure financial footing without continuing to see higher prices and lower service levels?
David Marroni (48:06):
So, in terms of that model, I don't think it is possible that USPS, on its own, without some sort of revenue increase, is going to cost growth, can get to a sustainable path.
(48:17)
I do think that Congressional action is going to be needed based on our work to address either first what's the level of service that the American people need? Is it the same? Less? More? And then figuring out how is that going to be funded? You could reduce services, and USPS could take actions, cut costs, increase revenues to try and meet that level of service, or you could reduce service levels, or something in between. But I don't think based on where things are right now, USPS, on its own, could ... It can take actions to reduce costs, it can take actions to increase revenue, but I don't think it can get there on its own.
Eleanor Norton (48:55):
The Postal Service must not only be accessible and reliable, its services must be also affordable. The American people need an affordable Postal Service. And I yield back.
Pete Sessions (49:08):
The gentlewoman yields back her time. I would also like to take just a second, and thank you for your service. This is not a point that we will be at as we will be later in the year, but I want to thank you both, Mr. Mfume, appreciate your not only insistence to come to every one of our subcommittee hearings, but to genuinely participate in that, and I appreciate you very much, and I want to thank you.
(49:37)
The distinguished gentleman Mr. Palmer from Alabama, you're recognized, sir.
Gary Palmer (49:42):
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. Postmaster General, Mr. Marroni, for being here. There's a report published by the Envelope Manufacturers Association. It's an economic study, and what they find is that your revenues have remained relatively stable at roughly $78 billion to $79 billion annually. But the controllable costs have continued to rise, increasing by billions of dollars over the past several years.
(50:23)
They make a point that if you could reduce controllable costs by just 2% annually, you would eliminate your operating losses, and reach breakeven in 2030. That's, basically, when this report was done, it would have been about five years. How do you respond to that?
David Steiner (50:44):
I'll tell you, I've been a part of two of the largest logistics companies in the world for the last 20 some odd years, waste management and FedEx. Neither of them have been able to do that. Everyone thinks, "Oh, it's easy. It's very easy. Just get productivity." The problem is you've got expenses rising. You've got to give employees pay increases. Fuel goes up.
Gary Palmer (51:09):
I'm going to interrupt you right there, because part of your increase in expenses has to do with the mandate to purchase next-generation delivery vehicles, which is a euphemism for electric vehicles. And the ones that the Post Office was buying from Oshkosh were, like, $20,000 more than your conventional vehicles. The ones you purchased from Ford were $10,000.
(51:37)
I know the federal government has allocated $3 billion in the so-called Inflation Reduction Act for this. But your overall cost is going to be close to $10 billion. When you're doing things like this that ... I can't make an economic case for this.
David Steiner (51:56):
Well, look, you're going to hear me say this repeatedly, and over and over again, if I'm in the private sector, I've got options. If I have 71% of my routes that are losing money, guess what I can do? Cut routes. If I have 80% of my stores that are losing money? You know what I can do? I can cut routes. I can raise prices. I can do all the things that I can do. In the public sector, we don't have options, we have mandates.
Gary Palmer (52:25):
Well, here's where you could help us out to help you. I'd like for you to provide to the subcommittee, and we'll provide it for the full committee, a breakdown of where your revenues come from. Is it personal mail? Business mail? Package delivery?
David Steiner (52:41):
Sure.
Gary Palmer (52:41):
Advertising junk mail? Business political mail-
David Steiner (52:44):
Marketing mail, please.
Gary Palmer (52:48):
Well-
David Steiner (52:49):
I used to make that same mistake. I don't make it anymore. I call it revenue.
Gary Palmer (52:52):
Okay. Well, but also where's your cost tied into this? You got a revenue stream from different types of delivery, but you've also got a cost. I think that would be helpful, and I think the-
David Steiner (53:07):
Of course.
Gary Palmer (53:07):
... GAO might-
David Steiner (53:07):
Of course.
Gary Palmer (53:10):
... be able to help somewhat with that as well, but getting back to this, I know there's a lot of angst or anger about delivery. My wife ordered a necklace. We live in Birmingham. It went to Birmingham, then it went to some place in Florida, and then it went to Orlando, and then it came back to ... What should have been three days was 10 days, and then she didn't like the necklace. So, that was another issue.
(53:38)
What we're trying to do is get you where you can operate, but we ... And I'm going to talk with the chairman of the full committee about what legislation we might be able to introduce that will help deal with some of these mandates. For instance, the electric vehicle issues, but also the management of the pension funds, these other things. Rather than come in and give us these things, give us some ideas on legislatively how we can fix this, because I'm not interested in beating up the Post Office. I'm interested in fixing it, and if it can't be fixed, then, Mr. Chairman, we need to look at other options.
David Steiner (54:15):
Yes. Would love to have that conversation.
Gary Palmer (54:18):
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to raise these questions. I yield back.
Pete Sessions (54:24):
I appreciate the Chairman ... I know we're all pressed on votes and a lot of things going on here, but, in fact, that when I consume my time, you will hear where we think we have been doing this, and have committed ourself to some other things. But the success of that rain dance has not been achieved, because the Postmaster General has embarked on some things that he was hoping would alleviate some of these thing, or give him a longer term answer, and that is still part of this discussion, and part of why we're here today. Yes, sir?
Gary Palmer (54:58):
Mr. Chairman, I want to make it clear that I would like for the Postmaster General's office to provide that breakdown of the revenues, so, that we can juxtapose those against where the costs are.
Pete Sessions (55:09):
Yes, sir. And I would respond back to the distinguished gentleman, tell him, "We agree our working group is to get there." And last month, we sat down with the Postmaster General, and his financial team, and did agree to do exactly that.
(55:27)
And this was going to be the first breakout session since that time, and I appreciate the gentleman. We'll be glad to share those with you. Yes, sir. Thank you very much.
(55:39)
Let's see. We now go to the Mr. Frost-
Maxwell Frost (55:44):
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.
Pete Sessions (55:45):
... you're recognized.
Maxwell Frost (55:46):
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Marroni and Postmaster General for being here. And, also, Postmaster General, thank you for taking the time to sit with us in that briefing a few months ago.
(55:57)
A couple topics I want to ask about. The first one is something I'm a bit concerned about. So, President Trump has announced his plans to require postal workers to question residents on their citizenship status as part of a summer pilot test for the 2030 census. An accurate census is the only way we can ensure fair and equal representation, it helps determine how Congressional districts are drawn, and make sure that federal funds reach communities.
(56:24)
Postmaster General, how does the Postal Service plan to address the gap in expertise if postal workers are expected to perform the duties of census workers?
David Steiner (56:35):
Yeah. As you've probably read, that's why we're doing two pilots. Very small pilots. I think the total cost is around $200,000, probably a little less than that. In one of the pilots, our folks will actually take the oath, and do the census. In the other, they'll do it as part of their postal duties.
(56:55)
And it comes from the fact that everything that in my conversations with the Secretary of Commerce, everything that he's talked about with respect to the census is how do we do it better cheaper? And he said, "The best way to do it better cheaper is to get people [inaudible 00:57:12] that they trust, that are there every day, that they probably know." So, they're going to open the door. So, they don't have to go back five and six times.
(57:20)
And so, it's strictly a pilot to see if we can do it faster, better, cheaper. And if so, that will be a service to the American public. Again, it is a big, big, big undertaking. And so, that's why we're doing the two pilots to see if we can make it work.
Maxwell Frost (57:38):
And how will you ensure service delivery is not impacted if postal workers have to balance their mail delivery duties with the administration of the census?
David Steiner (57:47):
Yeah. Look, that's why we're doing the pilots. Actually, it would be good for the carriers, because they can make a little bit of overtime. A lot of our carriers like to earn the overtime.
(57:57)
But that's why we're doing it, so, that we can figure out how do we best make it work for our employees and for the census? Again, a long way before we actually get it done. That's why we're doing the pilots. Hopefully, we'll be able to do it faster, better, cheaper.
Maxwell Frost (58:12):
Thank you. Also, the Postal Service is implementing a new transportation plan. This is the RTO, Regional Transportation Optimization, initiative, which may impact 72% of postal offices.
(58:24)
The Postal Service office of the Inspector General has projected that this plan may slow mail delivery. People rely on USPS to get mail quickly, medications, their ballots, bills, et cetera. Are you confident that you can ensure that the RTO initiative will not slow mail delivery?
David Steiner (58:42):
Absolutely certain, because, actually, RTO doesn't affect delivery. It only affects collection. So, on delivery, there has been absolutely no change. The only change that RTO brings is on collection.
Maxwell Frost (58:56):
Okay. Okay. Got you. And then the last thing I want to talk about is the fact that the USPS is not a business opportunity. It provides essential services like helping rural Americans get their prescriptions, private carriers charge extra to deliver to rural areas, even if they deliver there at all. You were talking about this at the options that private corporations may have that we don't have. And it's a good thing we don't have those options, because no matter what our postal workers are going to deliver the mail no matter where you live. And that's part of what separates this service that we all believe in from a business.
(59:35)
Rural areas are already losing their hospitals and pharmacies, and it's more important than ever that rural Americans can get their medication from the USPS. Mr. Marroni, if the Postal Service was privatized how would this impact people in my district or across the country? How could that impact their day-to-day experience with the USPS?
David Marroni (59:55):
So, there's definitely trade-offs with privatization. It's possible they might be able to reduce costs and increase revenues faster, but that also means they might not serve certain routes that aren't profitable, they might close postal locations that are not profitable either to get to profitability.
Maxwell Frost (01:00:10):
What type of Americans, what type of people could expect maybe a loss in service if it was privatized?
David Marroni (01:00:16):
So, there is the higher percentage of rural in small community locations that are unprofitable. So, there are some urban areas as well that have unprofitable locations, but the bulk is going to be rural and small. So, that's where it would disproportionately fall.
Maxwell Frost (01:00:26):
Okay. Thank you. I yield back.
Pete Sessions (01:00:30):
Thank you very much. The gentleman yields back his time. We are now on votes. There are four votes that are being called. I have advised the gentleman Mr. Gill he will be first one when we come back. And there will be these four votes that will take probably a good bit of time. We figured this one out before. [inaudible 01:00:50] rules in the mix, but let's advise the members that we will come back 10 minutes after the last vote. I'd like to have members come back. This is a very important hearing. We have distinguished members who have taken their time to be here this afternoon. Mr. Gill, you will be the first one when we return. And I would say to the witnesses and people here, thank you for taking time. I'm sorry this is the part of our business that we just have to go through. So, the committee will now be in recess.
Speaker 1 (01:02:00):
(silence)
Mr. Sessions (01:58:42):
Subcommittee come to order and thank you very much. Apologize for the delay. We now will go back with members' opportunities for their questions. Gentlemen from Texas, Mr. Gill's recognized.
Mr. Gill (01:58:58):
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. And thank you to Postmaster General Steiner and to Mr. Marroni for taking the time to be here. We certainly really appreciate it. Mr. Steiner, I want to begin with a few questions for you. Do you know how many of the drivers who haul mail for USPS are using non-domiciled CDLs?
David Steiner (01:59:21):
To my knowledge, at this point, none.
Mr. Gill (01:59:24):
Do you know if it's a lot or just a few?
David Steiner (01:59:27):
None.
Mr. Gill (01:59:29):
From what I'm hearing from mail processing centers, there's been quite a few. In fact, I've heard from several large ones who have said something to the extent about half of the drivers who are coming to pick up mail appear to be non-domiciled, that they typically don't even speak English. I've heard that over half of them don't speak English. There's been suggestions that many of them are perhaps illegal aliens. Are you familiar with that?
David Steiner (01:59:54):
I'm not sure where that information comes from, but-
Mr. Gill (01:59:57):
It's coming from major mail processing facilities.
David Steiner (02:00:00):
That probably wouldn't surprise me, but my guess is that-
Mr. Gill (02:00:04):
Sorry, it wouldn't surprise you that there's a lot of drivers who are non-domiciled?
David Steiner (02:00:08):
No, it wouldn't surprise me that that's where the information's coming from, because if you look at the information from our United States Postal Inspection Service, everybody that hauls for us has to go through a check with them. I think they've probably got better information.
Mr. Gill (02:00:22):
And what is that information?
David Steiner (02:00:24):
That every driver that drives for us, whether they're an employee or whether they're part of a third-party contractor, has to go through and make sure that they are a domiciled CDL holder.
Mr. Gill (02:00:37):
Is that being enforced? Because I've been told by multiple different parties that rule is not in fact being enforced in any meaningful way.
David Steiner (02:00:45):
I've been told by our postal service that it is.
Mr. Gill (02:00:47):
Okay. This is from a postal whistleblower. Here are multiple non-domiciled licenses from one hour of check-ins at one USPS facility. This was from March of 2026 that's been recorded.
David Steiner (02:01:05):
Yeah. If you'd send that on to us, I'll have our Postal Inspection Service look at that and find out what happened.
Mr. Gill (02:01:10):
We've also got recording from Pete Routsolias, who's the VP of transportation strategy at USPS, who has said, "We didn't understand the magnitude of how many people are using non-domiciled CDLs, suggesting that I attempted to stop this practice, but realize that there are too many drivers who are using these non-domiciled CDLs so it wasn't, I guess, practicable to enforce that particular ruling." Are you familiar with that at all?
David Steiner (02:01:41):
Not familiar at all, no.
Mr. Gill (02:01:42):
So it's your testimony that there are no mail carriers, excuse me, who are non-domiciled CDL drivers?
David Steiner (02:01:51):
No. My testimony is that I'm not aware of the conversation that you're referencing.
Mr. Gill (02:01:56):
Okay. What are you guys doing to ensure that there are no non-domiciled CDL drivers carrying our mail?
David Steiner (02:02:02):
Our Postal Inspection Service looks at everybody that drives mail.
Mr. Gill (02:02:06):
Can you explain how that's being enforced?
David Steiner (02:02:09):
How do you mean, how's it being enforced?
Mr. Gill (02:02:10):
How are you ensuring that none of the drivers are in fact non-domiciled CDLs?
David Steiner (02:02:15):
We require our third-party contractors-
Mr. Gill (02:02:17):
By what mechanism are you enforcing that other than a theoretical requirement?
David Steiner (02:02:23):
I don't know how you can do anything other than in-person. I mean, our folks are-
Mr. Gill (02:02:29):
Are drivers required to use a post badge?
David Steiner (02:02:33):
As far as I know they are, yes.
Mr. Gill (02:02:34):
And I've heard from multiple mail processing facilities who are telling me that none of that is being enforced in any meaningful way. And it seems based on-
David Steiner (02:02:46):
If you'll bring me that information, we'll make sure it stops.
Mr. Gill (02:02:49):
I'd be happy to do that because I don't think that makes our roads any safer.
David Steiner (02:02:53):
No, you're absolutely right. And look, we all agree that safety is number one, but let's put it in perspective. You have 2,000 deaths every year from gig drivers driving. You've got other companies using them to deliver packages. Those folks are untrained-
Mr. Gill (02:03:09):
USPS is outsourcing that as well.
David Steiner (02:03:12):
We don't have any gig drivers for the United States Postal Service.
Mr. Gill (02:03:15):
But the mail carriers, excuse me, are not necessarily USPS employees. Is that correct?
David Steiner (02:03:22):
That is not correct. They are.
Mr. Gill (02:03:24):
You don't outsource any of that?
David Steiner (02:03:25):
We do not.
Mr. Gill (02:03:27):
So every single delivery truck that is carrying mail in the United States is an employee of USPS.
David Steiner (02:03:34):
That delivers to our customers, absolutely.
Mr. Gill (02:03:36):
Or that is transporting mail?
David Steiner (02:03:39):
Oh, no. Transporting mail's a whole different [inaudible 02:03:41].
Mr. Gill (02:03:41):
That's what I'm talking about here.
David Steiner (02:03:42):
We're talking about delivery. I don't think gig drivers are transporting mail. They're transporting individual packages to customers and there's 2,000 people dying every year because they're going through neighborhoods.