Bill · S. 661· Senate(119-S-661)
Postal Processing Protection Act
- Introduced
- 2/20/2025
- Last activity
- 2/20/2025 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- Sponsored by
- Mike Rounds
- Cosponsors
- - 2 - 2
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "Postal Processing Protection Act," aims to change how the United States Postal Service handles facility closures. It specifically targets the amendment of section 404(d) of title 39, United States Code. The primary goal is to expand the scope of requirements applied when closing certain facilities. Instead of just focusing on post offices, the new language includes processing, shipping, delivery, distribution, or other facilities. These facilities must be owned or operated by the Postal Service and support one or more post offices.
Yes· 3 of 4
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?+4
By expanding protections to include distribution and processing facilities, the bill helps safeguard the logistical infrastructure that rural areas rely on.
Does this invest in rural communities?+3
The bill provides extra protections against the closure of processing and distribution facilities that support post offices, which is critical for rural connectivity.
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?+2
Protecting postal infrastructure helps ensure reliable access to essential services for low-income households.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Expanded Protection for Essential Infrastructure: By expanding the language from just "post offices" to include "acceptance, processing, shipping, delivery, distribution, or other facility[ies]" (Section 2), the bill ensures that the facilities supporting post offices are subject to specific requirements before they can be closed.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts are explicitly stated in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Rural Residents+4Good For Low Income Households+2
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Rural Development+3
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+2
- 2/26/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/20/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Marsha BlackburnRepublican · Tennessee
Richard DurbinDemocrat · Illinois
Roger WickerRepublican · Mississippi
Peter WelchDemocrat · Vermont