Talk:Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act
![]() | A fact from Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 June 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- ... that the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act includes a requirement for the U.S. Postal Service "that no other entity, private or public, has to make"? Smith, Noah. "Congress, Not Amazon, Messed Up the U.S. Postal Service". Bloomberg. Retrieved 2020-05-17.
- ALT1:... that an op-ed referred to the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act as "one of the most insane laws [U.S.] Congress ever enacted"? Casey, Dan (2014-07-05). "Casey: The most insane law by Congress, ever? | Local News". roanoke.com. Retrieved 2020-05-17.
- ALT2: ... that a member of the United States Congress referred to the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act as "one of the worst pieces of legislation Congress has passed in a generation"?
- Reviewed: IOU
Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 21:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC).
- Seems strange that we didn't have an article on this until now. Anyway, the article is new (May 17), long enough (2,288 bytes of prose per Wikipedia:Prosesize), and meets the core policies/guidelines. Both hooks pass merit as well. For obvious reasons, #2 is more incendiary and is likely to get more attention. Muboshgu, I added "[the US]" to hook #2 to make it clear what country we're talking about. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
- Small addendum, Muboshgu: three citations need proper titles. I added two titles where I could see them despite the newspapers.com blurring done when a person doesn't have a subscription, added proper newspaper vs. publisher vs. "via" formatting, page numbers, and converted the news citations to {{cite news}}. (Please don't input newspaper.com citations automatically in the future—that was a lot of work!) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:46, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
- The ed17, yes, I have to finish fixing up the citations. I didn't expect you to do any of that! I personally find it easier to run it through Reflinks and then fix it after. I'll try to do that and QPQ today. And I'm adding a link to Alt 1. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
- And I'm adding Alt 2. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:18, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, Muboshgu! Still waiting on the QPQ. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:03, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- The ed17, here you go! Template:Did you know nominations/Brad Ashford. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:17, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you! All good to go.
Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:45, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you! All good to go.
compelled to pay in advance for the next 50 years
[edit]This seems inaccurate. The sources are a John Oliver routine and a newspaper clipping that does not say anything about 50 years of payments coming due up front. H.R.6407 describes an amortization schedule intended to balance ("provides for the liquidation of any liability or surplus") the fund by 2056, with annual payments. This seems like a typical arrangement for a pension: forecasting the cost of benefits and making annual deposits of the "net present value" (i.e. adjusted for anticipated interest and inflation) to keep the fund in balance. The GAO found that these payments ceased in 2017 and "USPS has said that its required payments to the fund are unaffordable relative to its current financial situation and outlook."
I suggest rewording the sentence to "It reorganized the Postal Rate Commission and stipulated that the price of postage could not increase faster than the rate of inflation." Wasoxygen (talk) 15:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Other things it mandates
[edit]Aside from the pension plan, it also prohibits it from providing banking services and doing commercial sales for things like phone cards. Services typically provided by other countries post offices that defray costs. Can this and sources be provided? LamontCranston (talk) 21:29, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- LamontCranston, is that the case? I haven't seen that in any of the sources I looked into when I wrote this page. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- Start-Class U.S. Congress articles
- Unknown-importance U.S. Congress articles
- Unknown-subject U.S. Congress articles
- Start-Class Philately articles
- Low-importance Philately articles
- All WikiProject Philately pages
- Start-Class United States articles
- Unknown-importance United States articles
- Start-Class United States articles of Unknown-importance
- Start-Class United States Government articles
- Unknown-importance United States Government articles
- WikiProject United States Government articles
- Articles created or improved during WikiProject United States' 50,000 Challenge
- WikiProject United States articles
- Start-Class law articles
- Unknown-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles