Schumer announces investigation into Postal Service policy changes

[flibbitygiblets]

Source: CNN

Speaking Sunday to reporters in New York City, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer announced a three-member subcommittee of the US Postal Service's Board of Governors tasked with investigating the USPS' policy changes ahead of the November election.

The subcommittee, which consists of two Democrat appointees to the board and one Republican, is expected to issue a public report within two weeks outlining how the USPS will ensure the timeliness of election mail and other critical services, Schumer said.
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy affirmed to lawmakers last week that he would suspend policy changes at the USPS until after the November election.

"Frankly, no one really believes him," Schumer said Sunday.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/23/politics/schumer-postal-service-investigation/index.html

---

the two-week window for the report was to "give us enough time to put the correct actions in place so that the elections will be held fairly."

[SunSeeker]

1. Have the Sargeant-at-Arms arrest those not complying with subpoenas!

[SheltieLover]

3. Absolutely!

No time for politeness! Play hardball right now!

[ehrnst]

9. That requires Barr to order the enforcement of the non-compliance of the subpoena

What do you think he'll do?

[BlancheSplanchnik]

13. 😵. 🤬. Effing Barr.

[ehrnst]

8. Congress needs to request enforcement of the non-compliance of the subpoena from Barr...

Do you really think he'll act on it?

[SunSeeker]

12. Hell no Barr won't enforce it. That's why they need to use the Sargeant-at-Arms.

And open up that little jail in the basement of the House, or wherever it is.

[ehrnst]

20. Here is the process, and it does not involve the Sargeant-at-Arms:

(Emphasis mine)

Criminal Contempt of Congress

The criminal contempt of Congress statute, enacted in 1857 and only slightly modified since, makes the failure to comply with a duly issued congressional subpoena a criminal offense. The statute, now codified under 2 U.S.C. § 192, provides that any person who “willfully” fails to comply with a properly issued committee subpoena for testimony or documents is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a substantial fine and imprisonment for up to one year.

The criminal contempt statute outlines the process by which the House or Senate may refer the non-compliant witness to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for criminal prosecution. Under 2 U.S.C. § 194, once a committee reports the failure to comply with a subpoena to its parent body, the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House is directed to “certify[] the statement of facts . . . to the appropriate United States attorney, whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action.”

26 The statute does not expressly require approval of the contempt citation by the committee’s parent body, but both congressional practice and judicial decisions suggest that approval may be necessary.

27 Although approval of a criminal contempt citation under § 194 appears to impose a mandatory duty on the U.S. Attorney to submit the violation to a grand jury, the executive branch has repeatedly asserted that it retains the discretion to determine whether to do so.

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45653

So, no there is no mention in the contempt process of Congress or the Senate sending the Sergeant-at-Arms to the subpoena scoffers' home to place them under arrest and bring them to the Jail at the Capitol.

[SunSeeker]

23. I'm talking about Congress's "inherent contempt" powers; per former AUSA Kirschner, they can arrest

Glenn Kirschner, former assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said Congress has the power to arrest, and has done so in the past:

Congress used its contempt powers in the 1920s to arrest and confine Mally Daugherty when he refused to appear pursuant to a subpoena in connection with the Teapot Dome scandal. It exercised its inherent contempt powers again in 1930s against U.S. Postmaster William MacCracken. In the MacCracken case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the existence and propriety of Congress’ implicit contempt power.

Without surveying all of the procedures involved in Congress exercising its inherent contempt power, the House of Representatives could send the sergeant at arms to arrest someone who is determined to be in contempt of Congress. The contemptuous witness could be confined in one of the secure rooms in the U.S. Capitol (which was done in the Daughtery case) or in the jail cells located at Capitol Police Headquarters. Once held in contempt, Congress could consider fines or imprisonment as a way to motivate a witness to purge the contempt by testifying fully and truthfully. Indeed, there is a corollary in the criminal justice system where a witness who refuses to testify at trial is held in contempt until he/she purges the contempt by testifying.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/why-democrats-congress-should-use-inherent-contempt-force-trump-officials-ncna1058861

Seems reasonable to me.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. I'm amazed Schumer got this far

I still don't think we have a lot of power here, other than public scrutiny and the perception that heads will roll in January if USPS management screws with the election.

Progress of a sort.

[Hoyt]

4. While such a report might help improve confidence in mail voting, I bet the report comes back

with findings such as:

1. Removal of blue mailboxes was no different than past years. 240,000 blue boxes have been removed since 1985. Due to reduction in letter mailing, there is less need for blue mailboxes. In fact, almost every originating site, home, etc., is there own mail box.

2. We have excess capacity in letter sorting machines as a result of the internet. We have 25 to 50% more sorting machines than really needed.

3. Delays were not due to sorting machines or blue boxes. Live birds, medications, etc., are not likely mailed through blue boxes or run through the flat letter sorters that have been removed because of excess capacity.

4. Overtime has long been an issue in the USPS. We encourage efforts to reduce overtime, including hiring full-time employees if more staff is needed.

5. In any event, the USPS will be held to a standard of delivering local ballots within 3 days of receipt. All ballots going to other states shall be delivered within 5 days. If necessary, USPS will approve overtime to handle influx of mail ballots, beginning mid-October.
_____________

Truthfully, I would have rather our Congress people were concentrating on getting enhanced unemployment to those who really need it, after it ran out 3 weeks ago.

[ancianita]

7. +1

[ehrnst]

10. +1000.

[Mr.Bill]

15. While I don't disagree with that,

read my link in post 14. This is a long running plot and there's more going on here than meets the eye.

[Mr.Bill]

5. Isn't that Board of Governors

made up entirely of Trump appointees?

[ehrnst]

11. "The subcommittee, which consists of two Democrat appointees to the board and one Republican,

is expected to issue a public report within two weeks outlining how the USPS will ensure the timeliness of election mail and other critical services, Schumer said."

[Mr.Bill]

14. There are two democrats, but they were appointed very recently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_Governors_of_the_United_States_Postal_Service

It turns out, during Obama's term, McConnell was not only blocking judicial appointments, he was blocking appointments to the Post Office Board of Governors. They've been working on this for awhile. Good news is they only get to fill out the terms of the person whose place they took and all but one of their terms expires during the next presidential term, so this is one more thing Biden can fix.

[PSPS]

18. Yes, the BoG is all trumpers. Schumer's committee is different from that.

[Mr.Bill]

19. Isn't it a subcommittee

of three members of the Board of Governors?

[PSPS]

21. Yes, you are correct. I misread the original article and drew the wrong conclusion.

However, the two "democrats" were appointed by trump, meaning they passed their loyalty test (i.e., "kissed the ring." ) So all three members of the sub-committee (in fact, every member of the BoG) are trump loyalists. He appointed them all.

[Mr.Bill]

22. I can't believe Schumer doesn't know this.

Oh, well, maybe there's some angle he sees that we don't.

[Blue Owl]

16. The cremated remains of the US Veteran that were lost would be of particular importance and weight

n/t

[turbinetree]

17. Yepper spot on................

[cstanleytech]

24. I really hope President Biden does not repeat the same mistake President Obama made with

Bush by essentially sweeping what they did under the rug in the guise of trying to get along with the Republicans as all that did was encourage them to behave even worse as we have seen.
No, we need a very detailed criminal investigation into what Russia did as well as any other corrupt acts that may have been committed by Trump and those in his administration not to mention the the Republicans in the House and Senate as its clear a number of them have likely been compromised by foreign powers.

[flibbitygiblets]

25. This question has been asked directly and answered just as directly.

Biden has no intention of sweeping this under the rug.

[yellowdogintexas]

26. Gym Jordan is disgusting, isn't he?

These guys are delusional

What does the Iowa caucus have to do with the USPS issues anyway?