Deregulate Mailboxes

The Postal Service doesn't trust Americans with their mailboxes.

Photo by Nikolay Tchaouchev on Unsplash

May 19 marked the start of Mailbox Improvement Week, and the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is urging consumers to “spruce up their mailboxes.” Even amid declining mail volumes, America’s mail carrier wants mailboxes to be “large enough to support the customer’s daily mail and package volume — within allowable size limits — and be of a design approved by the postmaster general.” Yet, consumers are deterred from keeping up with their mailboxes due to the USPS zealously overregulating these prime pieces of postal real estate. The ailing agency needs to let a thousand flowers bloom and allow consumers to use their mailboxes as they see fit—including permitting deliveries from the USPS’ competitors. The USPS must also take basic and common-sense steps to keep mailboxes safe from postal thieves.

It’s Property Ownership 101: people only want to invest in things they own and for which they can reap the rewards. While homeowners are responsible for mailbox upkeep, the USPS has the ultimate say in what the boxes can, and cannot, be used for. The agency has repeatedly warned people that only authorized agency personnel can deposit (postage paid) materials in mailboxes. And, consumers “are not allowed to affix anything to [mailboxes or place anything on top of them], including flyers, signs about missing items or animals, and advertisements.”

Even the Girl Scouts have gotten the memo. For example, the Girl Scouts of North East Ohio explicitly instruct their members and volunteers not to place any materials, such as flyers or cookie program information, into mailboxes without proper postage, acknowledging the federal prohibition. First put into place by Congress in 1934, these onerous mailbox restrictions aren’t going away anytime soon. In 1997, the Government Accountability Office noted that nearly six in ten Americans favor allowing USPS competitors such as United Parcel Service (UPS) and FedEx access to their mailboxes. But, America’s mail carrier opposes any reform that could erode its monopoly in any way. Other agencies such as the Department of Justice are similarly against mailbox reform, but for the bizarre reason that “the restriction deters the distribution of sexually explicit materials to mailboxes.”

Whatever the reason offered, maintaining this prohibition makes Americans far less likely to buy larger and more package-friendly mailboxes that the USPS is so fond of. If Americans cannot legally get most of their packages delivered into their mailboxes, they likely won’t go the extra mile to spend money upgrading their receptacles. That reluctance in turn makes it more likely that postal workers will have to spend the extra time (and risk dog bites) to bring packages to Americans’ doorsteps rather than simply driving up to a mailbox.

For all its stipulations on what can go in or on a mailbox, the USPS does a remarkably abysmal job protecting its de facto property. Thieves have been targeting personal mailboxes in addition to blue USPS collection boxes, yet the postal police force remains sequestered around federal properties. Postal leadership has claimed that these police officers cannot patrol the streets because of laws on the books. The relevant legal language states that the service “may employ police officers for duty in connection with the protection of property owned or occupied by the Postal Service or under the charge and control of the Postal Service, and persons on that property, including duty in areas outside the property to the extent necessary to protect the property and persons on the property.”

That’s a mouthful, but it’s easy to see where postal leadership has gone astray in their interpretation of the law. The “protection of property owned or occupied by the Postal Service” makes it sound like the postal police force is limited to securing post offices and administrative buildings. The key overlooked language addresses property “under the charge and control” of the service. Because the service claims a monopoly on what goes inside mailboxes, it’s reasonable to infer that the agency effectively controls that property even though it doesn’t outright own mailboxes. And, if mailboxes meet the definition of protectable property under the law, postal police are indeed permitted to patrol mail carriers’ delivery routes.

If the USPS does a better job protecting Americans’ mailboxes and allows consumers to use them as they see fit, perhaps there would finally be some incentive for do-it-yourself “mailbox improvement.” A little choice and flexibility shouldn’t be such a red flag for America’s mail carrier.