The reforms to the post office by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who resigned yesterday, made the post office slower and more inefficient. He removed sorting machines, which caused mail to be sorted by hand, a much slower, less accurate means of sorting. In addition he refused to pay overtime, so trucks, already delayed by sorting difficulties, had to stop delivery until the next day. In Atlanta, a letter that took previously two days to be delivered could take a week, since mail was sent to a new center which might send a letter to Alabama and then back to Georgia, delaying service. DeJoy had his own ambition to privatize the post office so his own company could compete. His mismanagement may continue to cast a destructive influence.
I agree! DeJoy was a nightmare. I think he was deliberately trying to make the PO less efficient so that private companies could swoop in and take over. The Postal Set I evis on the Constitution, for God's sake! It shouldn't be privatized by for profit companies. That's what's wrong with our healthcare or homeowners insurance. These people won't be happy until they can find a way to charge for the oxygen we breathe (I feel that's a future side-line venture for oil companies that are polluting as fast as they can). They want to take over everything 'public' so that they can rob the public. I use the Post Office regularly (not just to receive mail but to send it also). I found that even paying extra for mail tracking doesn't guarantee it will get to where it's going. I was told by that 'rep in the Sky' (as you cannot get a local number for the last place it was tracked) that they only knew as much as I already did from looking on my phone. I blame DeJoy! I'm glad to see go, but who know what idiot of a person that the orange mafioso will replace him with (maybe one of Musk's teenie boppers? They could steal our mail as well as our identities). At this rate maybe we'd do well to return to Pony Express. Oh yeah and the reason they were in the red before (as I understand) was because of some hair brained idea of Congress that they should front load employees' retirement funds.
The argument is silly. Many states count mailed ballots postmarked on or before Election Day. The refusal to count them is no more than an attempt to disenfranchise a number of legally entitled voters.
Cogent and clear exposition of the problems associated with voting for people who cannot come to the polling place (eg homebound, disabled, no transportation, long distance to the polling place) but who can get the ballot postmarked and mailed on time, but may be delayed in arrival at the polling place. It seems totally unfair to disenfranchize voters who have filled out their ballot and put it in the mail before or on election day, but then it is received after election day. Consider, for instance states like Alaska, and other large states with significant distances to travel to vote; or people whose work schedules prevent them from being able to go to a polling place, but they can fill out a ballot and mail it, and other examples you can think of.
It's hard to believe that the Supreme Court should even hear this case. Most states have reasonable mail-in-voter processes in place. Human logic would lean towards allowing the voters of each state to provide input on how the state will handle Mail-in ballots. State (representative bodies, or by state voter referendum) should be able to set parameters that do not exclude eligible voters, who, due to any number of personal circumstances, are compelled to submit their ballot via the mail or drop box. It is shameful that some individual states may have legitimate votes remain uncounted, due to a later reception date than allowed. The most logical path forward would be to require a postmarked ballot on or before the election date, with a designated reasonable window after the election day for accepting and counting those mail -in ballots which have met the posting date guidelines set for and approved by the voters of each state. Any voter who has met the guidelines should have their vote counted!
The reforms to the post office by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who resigned yesterday, made the post office slower and more inefficient. He removed sorting machines, which caused mail to be sorted by hand, a much slower, less accurate means of sorting. In addition he refused to pay overtime, so trucks, already delayed by sorting difficulties, had to stop delivery until the next day. In Atlanta, a letter that took previously two days to be delivered could take a week, since mail was sent to a new center which might send a letter to Alabama and then back to Georgia, delaying service. DeJoy had his own ambition to privatize the post office so his own company could compete. His mismanagement may continue to cast a destructive influence.
I agree! DeJoy was a nightmare. I think he was deliberately trying to make the PO less efficient so that private companies could swoop in and take over. The Postal Set I evis on the Constitution, for God's sake! It shouldn't be privatized by for profit companies. That's what's wrong with our healthcare or homeowners insurance. These people won't be happy until they can find a way to charge for the oxygen we breathe (I feel that's a future side-line venture for oil companies that are polluting as fast as they can). They want to take over everything 'public' so that they can rob the public. I use the Post Office regularly (not just to receive mail but to send it also). I found that even paying extra for mail tracking doesn't guarantee it will get to where it's going. I was told by that 'rep in the Sky' (as you cannot get a local number for the last place it was tracked) that they only knew as much as I already did from looking on my phone. I blame DeJoy! I'm glad to see go, but who know what idiot of a person that the orange mafioso will replace him with (maybe one of Musk's teenie boppers? They could steal our mail as well as our identities). At this rate maybe we'd do well to return to Pony Express. Oh yeah and the reason they were in the red before (as I understand) was because of some hair brained idea of Congress that they should front load employees' retirement funds.
I unequivocally have absolutely no trust in the decisions coming out of the so-called supreme court of this country.
The argument is silly. Many states count mailed ballots postmarked on or before Election Day. The refusal to count them is no more than an attempt to disenfranchise a number of legally entitled voters.
Cogent and clear exposition of the problems associated with voting for people who cannot come to the polling place (eg homebound, disabled, no transportation, long distance to the polling place) but who can get the ballot postmarked and mailed on time, but may be delayed in arrival at the polling place. It seems totally unfair to disenfranchize voters who have filled out their ballot and put it in the mail before or on election day, but then it is received after election day. Consider, for instance states like Alaska, and other large states with significant distances to travel to vote; or people whose work schedules prevent them from being able to go to a polling place, but they can fill out a ballot and mail it, and other examples you can think of.
all other things aside, use as an analogy mailing of tax returns - need to be postmarked by April 15th. Not received by then
excellent points.
It's hard to believe that the Supreme Court should even hear this case. Most states have reasonable mail-in-voter processes in place. Human logic would lean towards allowing the voters of each state to provide input on how the state will handle Mail-in ballots. State (representative bodies, or by state voter referendum) should be able to set parameters that do not exclude eligible voters, who, due to any number of personal circumstances, are compelled to submit their ballot via the mail or drop box. It is shameful that some individual states may have legitimate votes remain uncounted, due to a later reception date than allowed. The most logical path forward would be to require a postmarked ballot on or before the election date, with a designated reasonable window after the election day for accepting and counting those mail -in ballots which have met the posting date guidelines set for and approved by the voters of each state. Any voter who has met the guidelines should have their vote counted!