A Rasmussen Poll over the weekend asked Americans if they would rather see an infusion of taxpayer money to support the Postal Service, or if they could live with cuts in service.
About 50% of American Adults believe the federal government should allow the Postal Service to curtail the workforce if it needs to reduce losses, rather than provide subsidies to cover those losses.
Thirty-three percent (33%) think the government should provide subsidies to cover the losses.
Another 17% are undecided what's best.
And rural areas should still get service, but 75% would rather see the USPS cut back mail delivery in some parts of the country to three or four days a week, rather than for the government to cover those losses. Only 17% would rather see the government provide more subsidies instead of cutting back delivery.
What do you think about the survey results? Comment here.
(To see survey question wording, click here.)
22 comments:
As a career USPS employee, I am agreeing with the no subsidies. Most lower management and craft employees know what needs to happen. The problem is, it won't. HQ will continue to nibble away at the backbone of the Service until it is gone. Are the offices which should be closed, yes. But, if there are less offices, why aren't their less middle and upper management employees? There were a few that left with the buyouts, most were just shuffled around.
Why would the Rasmussen Poll ask the question for the subsidies from the taxpayers to sustain the postal service? To my knowledge, the postal service has never asked for any subsidies(taxpayer bailout from Congress)---just to be credited with the overpayments in the billions of dollars of its own money, not the taxpayers. Talk about a loaded question with a very predictable answer.
The wording of the survey questions is designed to influence the results, which is typical of Rasmussen polls, but not of legitimate, unbiased, polls, like Gallup or Harris. By making the alternatives either a cut in service or a taxpayer subsidy -- AKA "bailout" -- the questions influenced the participants to choose a cut in service. The poll is geared to support the legislation sponsored by Congressman Issa, to basically liquidate USPS and privatize most of its functions.
If a poll was taken on whether or not we should have a departmen of education, or department of agriculutre.....and 98% of respondants said no....would congress close those departments? No. They were created under an act of Congress......just like the USPS. Post offices were installed for a reason, and until that reason (not just dollars) is no longer required...they should remain. The congressman of each state should be the one who decides when post offices are closed in their state. When they decide its necessary, they should have a meeting and vote on the issue. It takes a vote of congress to name/rename a post office...why should it be up the PMG to decide when to close it? How about this idea....when the PMG wants to close an office...it must go to Congress and if Congress decides it should remain open...that office is taken away from the USPS control and it's ran by the state...but still paid for by the USPS. :)
The question was leading to an obvious answer and the American people have very little idea how many other things should be cut in the PO long before service should be cut anywhere!
This one made me spit fire! Rasmussen Reports™ took a poll of 1000 adults about the Postal Service. The results are not at all representative. The questions of this poll are clearly manipulated with false information. We deliver 150million addresses six days a week. How in heck Rasmussen Reports™ thinks the oppinion of 1000 people is representative of what we do? Part of our loses are due to the 5.5billioon dollar payment to Pre-found Health Benefits for Future Retirees. Disgusting!
The title of this should have been "What a FEW Americans Think About Postal Service Losses."
the poll is red baiting-the po made a profit this fiscal year if you remove the burden of overfunding their retiree's pension & health fund which congress forced on them several years ago-remove the overfunding & they would be in the black-why isn't this the debate we are having
gc
One reason this poll can't be taken seriously is because most Americans believe we are already being subsidized by the government. The questions were indeed, leading. With the economy as it is, I am surprised anyone agreed to subsidies. The American public does not understand how we are funded currently. I agree with Grannybunny.
I agree with all the above comments
Especially the "Spit Fire." Wonder how much it cost the Post Office for all the surveys, reports, etc. that are conducted to tell us how much money we are losing. And in my book all this STUFF can read anyway you want it too. For sure NOT a true picture of the Postal Service.
I, too, disagree with the "would you rather" wording of the questions. They were designed to support a particular outcome, and, by only polling 1000 people, of course they got the results they wanted!
Here's an idea, when a post office is being considered for closure, put it on the ballot and let the people in that town vote on it!!
Surveys are usually construed. Closing small Post Offices is not the answer. First class mail use to be our bread and butter and the first class mail decline will continue to progess. I think we should be charging everybody $20 yearly to receive their mail. If they move they will need to pay another $20. What is free anymore? Also the payment to the retirement fund needs to be corrected.
The polls are like our VOE surveys. They ask guided questions in favor of the person asking the question. Then the results are used against the employees. That is exactly why postal employees stopped responding to the VOE. The postal service wants to close the small offices so the questions are written to support that idea. For example, if you had to loose a hand...would you rather loose your left hand or right? End result, most Americans favor losing their left hands. If you asked more open ended questions, you might actually get a more factual question.
Speaking of nothing being free anymore, why do we continue to babysit adult's mail for them. When they put in a permanent forward, they should have about 30 days of free forwarding and that's it!
My question is this....Why are we cutting out the rural post offices, that give a community a since of being a part of the whole? Why not go to the larger cities that have 3, 4 or even 5 offices in it and cut some of them out? people in the city are used to being on the go at all times. What would an extra mile or two be to them when all they have to do is jump on city transport, which i'm sure is cheaper then paying for the gas themselves. There is enough offices in the cities that they caould afford to lose one or two.
Somone once told me "Graphs and charts don't lie. Liars use charts and graphs.....
I work in a rural post office with a population of about 70 people...most of them elderly. I feel bad that I can't even answer their questions when they ask what is going to happen if the post office closes. When are we going to have some answers????
I love your comment about the grah's and chart's. That is right on the money!!!!!!
What i don't understand is why we spend money on background check's for new hire's. The background check they send back to us i can do in five minutes from my computer from home!!!!! And it is the samething this company is sending to us!!!!!!!!!!
They are not going to gives us any answer's to anything. They do not want us to fight back!!! They tied our hands and gaged us so we can't help save our post offices!! We know to much!!! We have to stand by and watch our communitee post offices close and the people lose the one thing they always had, there post office. It is really sad. These small rural post offices may not make a bunch of money but we can give the customer the extra service and attention they want. If you make them go to these larger offices they get to stand in long lines. They will get service but will it be the same?
If you live outside of the city limit's you are screwed!! You will have to travel to get your mail or to do any of your mailing service's. Now how is that fair? Some people just do not like living in the city. Some of us like the nice quite life.
I have been amazed and somewhat shocked at the negative and angry comments regarding rural PO's and residents that I've been reading in national news articles. Wow, when did all this hate start toward rural communities? They seem to want us all to move to the city and don't want to "subsidize" our rural PO's. I wonder how I'm going to graze my cows and grow my corn in downtown New York City? Where do these people think their food comes from? I guess the hate has been taught in our schools for many years and I'm just now becoming aware of how widespread it has become. It makes me sad.
Post a Comment