Lima postal workers rally against privatization
Mar. 20—LIMA — Braving the cold and wind is nothing new for Lima postal workers, but they were doing so for a different reason Thursday morning.
"It's just basically to bring awareness to what would happen if the administration removed our public service status that's in the Constitution and the Postal Service Act," local APWU president Mike McKitrick said at the union's rally to protect the post office. "We're here to give mail service to everybody on every address, no matter what. It doesn't cost a fee for us to deliver your mail, and we have the ability to deliver to every single household."
At a media availability at the same time, U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Urbana, said he preferred to leave any ideas in the hands of the House Oversight Committee.
"I understand we want that to work well because it is mentioned in our Constitution, and I think we'll take a look at all of it and see what makes sense as we move forward," Jordan said. "I remember when they moved the distribution center from Lima 10 or 15 years ago. Everyone wants to get their mail in a timely fashion, but in the electronic age, it's a little different."
McKitrick pointed to the moving of the distribution center specifically as one of the many things that have negatively impacted the efficiency of the post office, not just in Lima but across the country. He pleaded with the community to reach out to representatives.
"Write letters to our state representatives and say we do not want to support this, and we are your constituents," he said. "We need you to help us with this fight because it isn't going to do any good if the mail service goes private, and we're paying for basic delivery of letters and parcels. It won't be good if we have to pay a subscription, but that's the reality of when anything goes private."
USPS Postmaster General Louis DeJoy announced his intention to step down in February (bit.ly/4hIIewh).DeJoy's tenure, which started in 2020, saw the post office weather the COVID-19 pandemic, an increase in mail-in voting and cuts designed to increase efficiency.
Reach Jacob Espinosa at 567-242-0399.
Featured Local Savings
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
15 minutes ago
- Axios
D.C. schools are banning cellphones, joining almost half of the nation
D.C.'s public schools will enforce a cell phone ban starting next school year, the district said on Friday. Why it matters: D.C. joins nearly half the country in the bipartisan push to limit students' cellphone use in the classroom. D.C. middle schools and several of its high schools already implemented the ban, the district said. Catch up quick: Phone bans have gained momentum across Democratic and Republican state legislatures in recent years. Arizona, Arkansas and New York 's governors signed bills into law this year to implement bans. By the numbers: As of April, 11 statewide phone bans or restrictions were implemented and seven states issued policy recommendations, according to health nonprofit KFF. An additional 17 states introduced legislation to ban or restrict cellphone use in schools. State of play: The phone bans are aimed at boosting students' attention during class as they struggle to recover from COVID learning loss. Screen time is also partially at fault for a youth mental health crisis, research has found. What they're saying: "Piloting a phone-free program in our middle schools demonstrated that storing students' personal devices throughout the school day enriches academic, social, and emotional learning," Lewis Ferebee, D.C. schools chancellor, said in a statement. "From increased classroom engagement to reduced anxiety and stronger student relationships — DCPS is ready to scale the program so we can keep driving outcomes that positively impact our students." What we're watching: Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) reintroduced a bipartisan bill in February to study the effects of cellphones in schools, but the legislation has not seen movement since. The bill proposes $5 million annually for five years for a pilot program to provide schools with secure containers for the phones. It would allow exceptions for students with health conditions, disabilities and non-English speakers.
USA Today
16 minutes ago
- USA Today
Live: Kilmar Abrego Garcia charged with human smuggling after return from El Salvador
Live: Kilmar Abrego Garcia charged with human smuggling after return from El Salvador Show Caption Hide Caption Kilmar Abrego Garcia neighborhood in El Salvador USA TODAY visited Kilmar Abrego Garcia's home neighborhood in El Salvador to get a better sense of who the man is. Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland man whose deportation to an infamous prison in El Salvador made his story a flashpoint in President Donald Trump's immigration policy, faces human trafficking charges after hewas returned to the United States, Attorney General Pam Bondi said. Abrego Garcia made more than 100 trips to move illegal immigrants across the United States, Bondi said. "Thousands of illegal aliens were smuggled," she said. Abrego Garcia "traded the innocence of minor children for profit," Bondi said. Abrego Garcia was indicted on two charges of unlawful transport of undocumented immigrants for financial gain. The indictment alleges Abrego Garcia also transported narcotics on more than 100 trips between Texas and Maryland. He also smuggled minors, court documents allege. 'Abrego Garcia… transported undocumented aliens in an unsafe manner, including using reconfigured vehicles with after-market unattached seating rows, and they transported children on the floorboards of vehicles in order to maximize profits,' the indictment alleges. -Nick Penzenstadler Abrego Garcia was sent to El Salvador's CECOT mega prison on March 15 in a move officials would later call an administrative "error." A 2019 court order barred his deportation to his native country due to security concerns. Abrego Garcia will face federal human trafficking charges after a two-count indictment was filled in Tennessee in May. "We should treat any of these charges with a high degree of suspicion and he should get a fair hearing in court because he isn't getting one in the court of public opinion,' said Chris Newman, Legal Director at the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, which represents Abrego Garcia's family. Newman and Rep. Glenn Ivey, D-Maryland, recently attempted to meet with Abrego Garcia in El Salvador and were denied access. Senator Chris Van Hollen, D-Maryland, met with Abrego Garcia briefly in El Salvador. "For months the Trump Administration flouted the Supreme Court and our Constitution," Van Hollen said in statement issued June 6. "Today, they appear to have finally relented to our demands for compliance with court orders and with the due process rights afforded to everyone in the United States. As I have repeatedly said, this is not about the man, it's about his constitutional rights – and the rights of all. The Administration will now have to make its case in the court of law, as it should have all along.' What does Abrego Garcia's indictment say? A federal grand jury handed down the indictment on May 21 in Nashville, according to court records. The indictment was sealed until government lawyers filed to open it on Friday, June 6. "From in or around 2016 through in or around 2025, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garica and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, conspired to bring undocumented aliens to the United States from countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Ecuador, and elsewhere," the indictment reads. "Ultimately passing through Mexico before crossing into Texas." The indictment alleges Abrego Garcia is a member and associate of the MS-13 gang, a claim his family has denied. The indictment alleges Abrego Garcia also transported firearms illegally purchased in Texas for distribution and resale in Maryland. It alleges Abrego Garcia would take undocumented immigrants' cell phones while being transported to ensure they would not contact anyone during the trip. If convicted, Abrego Garcia would face 10 years in U.S. prison and a $250,000 fine.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee has warned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that he could be 'on the hook' for hundreds of millions of dollars for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government. In a letter sent Wednesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that Hegseth's formal acceptance of the Boeing 747 jetliner last month — a move made so the Air Force can upgrade its security measures so it may eventually be used as Air Force One — violates the Constitution Emoluments Clause. The rule bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without congressional approval. 'I write now to urge and advise you to promptly mitigate these violations—and your own personal legal exposure—by either returning the plane to the Qatari government or promptly seeking Congress's consent to accept it,' Raskin wrote. The Pentagon announced on May 21 it officially accepted the 13-year-old luxury jet previously used by the Qatari royal family, a supposed 'free,' gift that could be used to supplement the aging Air Force One fleet, according to President Trump. The transfer has been criticized by U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who say it raises ethical and corruption questions in addition to costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars to retrofit the plane into a secure and working Air Force One. Others have focused on the national security risks of such a gift, saying the aircraft would have to be swept for listening devices. Some have worried that in Trump's push to use the plane before he leaves office, the Air Force will rush security upgrades and cut corners on protection systems. A former professor of constitutional law and former ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Raskin has focused his criticisms on the ethical issues around accepting the Qatari plane, repeatedly arguing that it requires congressional approval. 'The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present 'of any kind whatever' from a foreign state without Congressional permission,' Raskin wrote on the social platform X last month after news of the gift broke. Congress has the authority to block federal officials from receiving gifts from foreign governments, as granted in the Constitution, but the government arm has not held any formal vote to accept the plane or not. Democrats largely have been unsuccessful in stopping Trump from accepting the Qatari jet. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last month attempted to pass a bill that would bar the use of a foreign jet as Air Force One, but that effort failed. Raskin, along with other Democrat lawmakers, have introduced resolutions to condemn the gift, but Republicans have blocked them from being considered on the floor. Making matters more complicated, Democrats, given their status as the minority party, can't convene any oversight hearings that would force government officials to testify on the issue, and their colleagues across the aisle have not called any such hearings themselves. In his letter, Raskin says Hegseth is in violation of the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which could prompt the Attorney General to bring civil action and penalties against him. Under that law, government officials can accept certain gifts up to $480 in value, and they cannot 'request or otherwise encourage the tender of a gift or decoration' from another country. In violating the act, Hegseth can face a penalty 'not to exceed the retail value of the gift improperly solicited or received plus $5,000.' 'In other words, you may be on the hook for $400 million (plus $5,000) even for a jumbo jet that you accepted on behalf of the President but do not get to personally enjoy,' Raskin writes, referring to the cost of a new Boeing 747-8 jet. 'If you truly believe that there is nothing untoward about the President asking for and receiving a $400 million 'flying palace' from a foreign power, then you should let Congress and the President's Republican colleagues vote to approve the transaction,' he adds. 'If you're unwilling to do that, you must return the plane to Qatar.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
