Home deliveries could soon look very different if the President signs off on his plan to shake up the US Postal Service.

Donald Trump is reportedly looking into privatizing the USPS to ‘save money’ in an initiative that economists warn could be ‘catastrophic’ if given the go-ahead.

As well as processing mail and delivery services across the US, millions of Americans in rural areas have depended on the service for everyday items, from online purchases to groceries, as well as other essentials like prescription medication, checks, and election ballets for more than 50 years.

The USPS carries packages on the ‘last mile’ of their journey for millions of rural Americans (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

The Postal Service fills in the gap to some communities where large delivery organizations like the UPS, FedEx and Amazon don’t go to due to fuel costs, labor and/or increased distances.

Unlike these private companies, the federal service is legally obligated to deliver mail to every US zip code at reasonable costs, meaning it takes the brunt of high operating costs.

Yet the president wants to change this by watering down a privatization plan for the service, which would drastically affect customers.

In the Oval Office last Friday (21 February), Trump said: “We want to have a post office that works well and doesn’t lose massive amounts of money … It’s just a tremendous loser for this country. Tremendous amounts of money are being lost. We think we can do something that will be very good.”

He also previously stated privatizing the USPS is ‘not the worst idea’.

According to The Washington Post, Trump has hinted at disbanding its 11-member leadership board of governors and shift it under the control of the Commerce Department, which inches inching closer to privatization.

The president is reportedly looking at shaking the US Postal Service (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

What would privatization of the USPS mean?

If Trump signs an executive order to make the change, it would mean many of those sky-high operating costs would be shouldered by residents who live in rural areas, which makes up 88 percent of all the land the USPS covers and are, interestingly, overwhelmingly (62 percent) Trump voters, reports The Independent.

However, the order would still need to be passed by Congress and the White House has reportedly denied an executive order is being prepared.

How would it change deliveries for residents?

Economists and letter carriers say the switch up would ‘radically change the way Americans receive deliveries’, with the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association (NRLCA) saying it would put who and who does not get the service open to discretion.

As the law required the USPS to deliver all addresses, it often takes on deliveries in the ‘last mile’ to homes that others can’t reach. If privatized, residents might have to foot the bill of that final leg, costing them more while their packages could take longer to arrive.

Home deliveries could look very different (Jeffrey Greenberg/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Another report indicated the universal service to every American address could be wiped or significantly reduced, either to fewer days per week or reverted to more central locations – in other words not door-to-door deliveries, reports CNN.

The NRLCA president Don Maston also said in a public letter that the move ‘threatens the integrity of a cherished institution’, adding: “Any attempt to weaken or privatize the USPS is an attack on the backbone of American communities — a move that will leave our rural citizens, our union members, and our common values exposed to the impulses of profit-driven interests.”

How would privatization of the US Postal Service save money?

Well, the USPS has historically been a black hole for funds, having lost an eye-watering $11 billion in the last two years, which the agency says boils down to factors beyond their control, like unfunded retiree pension liabilities, and non-cash workers’ compensation adjustments.

That said, it reported $144 million in net income in the last three months of 2024 – the first profitable quarter since 2022 – which it attributes to a dip in first class letters and hike in online shopping packages, reports CNN.

But the problem persists that there are at least 700,000 retirees that rely on agency pension benefits, which is significantly higher than the Postal Service’s 500,000 active members.

The Postal Reorganization Act, passed by Congress in 1971, effectively made it an independent self-funded agency, too.

Deliveries to your front door could cost more or take longer, experts argue (Getty Images)

What do economists say about the idea?

According to Monique Morrissey, a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute think tank, the USPS’ costs when coupled against broader competition in the delivery sector are the prevailing reasons it is losing money.

However, Morrissey believes the Trump administration will abandon any such plan that leads to its privatization when officials realize how it could upset a swathe of Republican voters.

“Members of Congress in rural states are very aware of the fact that commerce is dependent on the Postal Service and if they [consumers] really had to pay their share of postage, it wouldn’t be cost-effective and small businesses would just move out of the state,” she said. “It would be catastrophic.”

“It would be a death spiral in many rural areas,” Morrissey continued. “Because the real cost of delivering to somebody who lives in an isolated, wooded area somewhere is 100 times what they’re actually paying for a stamp.”

She also said there is ‘no real good reason’ to do it, arguing it can be better maintained if high retiree costs are factored out.

Donald Trump has done what presidents of the United States have actively declined to challenge in the past – and it could greatly expand his power, experts say.

Trump’s second term in office has already been marked with a flurry of executive orders being signed, including renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, tax tariffs on Canada and China, and one targeting transgender women in sports.

Earlier this month, the father-of-five also signed orders to end Covid-19 vaccine mandates in schools, eliminating the procurement of paper straws and creating a new White House Faith Office to replace the ‘White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives’.

Donald Trump has signed a slew of executive orders since resuming office (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

On Tuesday (February 18), President Trump, 78, signed his latest executive order to bring notoriously independent agencies under the White House’s control.

How the executive order would affect independent agencies

This now means all agencies – such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – must submit draft regulations for the president to review instead of just giving them the green light themselves.

They must also consult with politicians on their ‘priorities and strategic plans’.

It’s also stipulated that there will be ‘no carve-out’ for the former independent agencies. The only exemption to this rule is the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy functions.

The order states that all executive branch officials and employees are now subject to Trump’s supervision and that the Office of Management and Budget will ensure tax dollars are being ‘spent wisely’.

“The President and the Attorney General (subject to the President’s supervision and control) will interpret the law for the executive branch, instead of having separate agencies adopt conflicting interpretations,” the order continues.

The FTC, the SEC, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are the three former independent agencies named in the document.

Trump claims they have all previously ‘exercised enormous power over the American people without Presidential oversight’.

The executive order alleges that this trio have issued rules and regulations that cost the country billions of dollars in the past and that they will ‘no longer impose rules on the American people without oversight or accountability’.

According to the writ, executive power has ‘no place’ in the United States.

Independent agencies must now report to the White House (Rebecca Noble/Getty Images)

“Executive power without responsibility has no place in our Republic. The United States was founded on the principle that the government should be accountable to the people,” the order reads.

“That is why the Founders created a single President who is alone vested with ‘the executive Power’ and responsibility to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed’.”

According to Politico, it will now be up to Russell Vought – acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau – to ‘establish performance standards and management objectives’ for the heads of the independent agencies’.

It’s said that he will ‘report periodically to the president’ on the agencies’ performance and efficiency while making ‘necessary and appropriate’ changes to the agencies’ budgets.

This will all be completed in line with the advancement of the President’s ‘policies and priorities’.

How the executive order could make Trump one of the most powerful presidents in history

By ‘reigning in’ and intruding on the independent agencies, Trump has greatly expanded his power as the 47th President of the United States, says Politico.

He is also breaking the mould, as former leaders like Barack Obama have not only declined to challenge the independent nature of the FTC, the SEC and the FCC in the past but have actively tried to avoid the appearance of interference.

The publication claims that some leaders of the independent agencies – who will now have to report to Trump – have lasted longer in office than actual presidents.

This is reportedly in an effort to ‘help shield them from political pressure’.

Donald Trump has certainly made some waves since return to the White House and one of his latest new executive orders could shift things significantly in the healthcare industry.

Donald Trump signed the new executive order in hopes it would increase transparency for patients when it comes to costs.

Healthcare providers and insurers must publicly disclose their prices so that patients can now weigh up the costs of receiving treatment in one place over another.

Currently, healthcare prices have traditionally been had behind close doors between doctors, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, and insurers.

Trump has garnered some support from this move and it marks a more aggressive approach to boost compliance with regulations that Trump introduced in 2019 that Biden threw out.

Donald Trump defended the executive order when speaking to the press (White House)

Donald Trump defended the new executive order as he signed it in front of reporters earlier this week.

He said: “It is one of the biggest things that can happen to reducing cost and healthcare.

“It takes a little while to kick in but Biden ended it immediately upon coming in which was a terrible travesty in my opinion.

“We are going to start up and we have even made it stronger by a couple of major factors.

He continued: “It allows people to go out and negotiate with price, you are not even allowed to talk about it when you go to a hospital and see a doctor.

“This allows you to go out and talk about it and it is actually one of the biggest… there are a couple of people that go back a long way that feel that there are real pros of this, this is the biggest thing you can do for cutting prices.”

Trump did admit that this move has proven unpopular in some circles but ultimately argued it would be better for patients.

Trump is confident this move will benefit US patients(Win McNamee/Getty Images)

He added: “It is not so good for the pharmaceuticals, the companies that make the drugs, I guess you could say it isn’t great for hospitals but they say if you have a great hospital that really knows what it is doing, it is actually great for the hospital because everyone wants to go there.”

Despite Trump’s claims this would ultimately lower prices, insurance industry groups have argued the opposite is true. They have said that regulations on costs would actually raise premiums.

As well as this, during Trump’s last presidency, hospital groups said that declaring prices for every item and service violated their First Amendment Rights.

They said the policy stripped them of their negotiating power to haggle prices when dealing with insurers.

Warning: This article contains discussion of trans issues which some readers may find distressing.

Just days ago, President Donald Trump had a heated debate with Maine Governor Janet Mills over his executive order banning trans athletes in women’ sports.

During a meeting with the governors at the White House on Friday (February 21), Trump told Mills that she must comply with his executive order which proposes to keep transgender women and girls from competing in women’s sports.

Trump singled out Mills during the discussion, as he explained that he had heard Maine is the only state that is unwilling to comply with his order, before insisting that he will pull funding from the state – including schools, if she refuses to follow his ruling.

“Are you not going to comply with it?” Trump asked her, to which Mills replied: “I’m complying with state and federal laws.”

The president then threatened: “We are federal law, you better do it. You better do it, because you’re not going to get federal funding… Your population doesn’t want men in women’s sports.”

“We’ll see you in court,” Mills replied.

“Good. I’ll see you in court. I’ll look forward to that. That should be a real easy one.” Trump responded. “And enjoy your life after, governor, because I don’t think you’ll be in elected politics.”

According to some of the governors, the discussion was ‘uncomfortable’.

Maine Governor Janet Mills challenged Trump at the meeting (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Speaking to Mail Online, vice-chair of the National Governors Association (NGA) Kevin Stitt, who is also the governor of Oklahoma, said: “It was a little uncomfortable in the room. But, like Governor Polis said, I wasn’t sure exactly what the backstory was behind the conflict there.”

Meanwhile, Colorado Governor Jared Polis claimed the discussion wasn’t great in terms of attempting to generate a productive discourse between members on the NGA.

“We always hope that people can disagree in a way that elevates the discourse and tries to come to a common solution.” he said.

However, Stitt went on to say that it ‘may have been good politics for both sides’, adding: “The NCAA has followed that, I think the Olympics have. And then you have a governor saying that they’re not going to follow that.

“So, I don’t know what legal background she has, but they talked about seeing each other in court. And we’ll see what happens.”

Part of Trump’s executive order aims to strip funding towards schools who allow trans girls to compete in women’s sport, however, the Maine Principal’s Association decreed earlier this month that they would still be allowing trans students to partake, citing the Maine Human Right’s Act, PBS reports.

President Donald Trump signed an order banning trans women and girls from competing in women’s sport (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Prior to his debate, Trump was reported as saying they wouldn’t be receiving federal funding ‘until they clean that up’.

In a statement, Mills said (via The Independent): “If the president attempts to unilaterally deprive Maine school children of the benefit of federal funding, my administration and the attorney general will take all appropriate and necessary legal action to restore that funding and the academic opportunity it provides.”

This led to an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights into Maine’s alleged violation of Title IX.

In a statement, Mills said she’d be working alongside the general attorney to defend Maine in court, however, she added that she believed this was about ‘whether a President can force compliance with his will, without regard for the rule of law that governs our nation’, which she says he ‘cannot’.