Letters to the Editor 7/30

Editor’s note: Pat Merritt, president of American Postal Workers Union, Clovis Local, said her letter represents the opinions of the majority of area APWU members.

Dear Editor:
The President’s Commission on the U.S. Postal Service, appointed in December, is considering a major overhaul of the nation’s mail system. In a report due to President Bush by Thursday, the commission could recommend drastic changes in mail service — changes that would result in increased postage costs and curtailed services for individuals and small businesses.
The American Postal Workers Union is concerned that such changes would have a devastating effect on the mission of the Postal Service: To bind our nation together by providing service and access to all — the residents of rural areas and inner cities, the elderly, communities both rich and poor and the businesses that serve them.
As postal employees, we are worried about any changes that would weaken the Postal Service, which plays such an important role in American life. I urge you to evaluate the effect any proposal would have on postal service to the nation.
Changes contemplated by the commission could have a negative effect on service for New Mexico and West Texas residents. These could include closing “unprofitable” post offices in rural areas and in inner-city communities, discontinuing six-day delivery, and ending universal service at uniform rates.
The changes being considered by the commission could jeopardize the future of the institution that has served our country for 227 years. They could endanger the vast network that unites our nation and serves individuals and commerce without regard to their economic status or location.
We urge you to keep track of the commission’s progress and to write to your legislators and ask them to also consider your concerns when Congress debates postal reform legislation.
Pat Merritt
President
APWU Clovis Local

Dear Editor:
In his column last week, self-described libertarian Tibor Machan concluded that libertarianism is clearly possible, while communism is not. This is confusing ideological apples with economic oranges.
Libertarianism is a social philosophy clearly impossible in the modern world, which cannot function without extensive government.
Communism was and is an economic social philosophy. From our perspectives and values, it has mostly failed. But it was at least grounded a little bit on economic reality, especially in the days of Marx and Engels.
Both philosophies are unrealistic, precisely because of the uncompromising development of their ideas.
Kirby Rowan
Portales