The USPS Is Under Threat as FedEx Cash Puts a Corporate Insider in Charge

The United States Postal Service delivers more than mail; it carries the weight of democracy, connecting every American from urban centers to remote rural routes. For generations, it has stood as a symbol of equity, ensuring access to communication and commerce for all. Now, a disturbing development threatens this vital institution. FedEx, a private delivery giant, donated $1 million to President Donald Trump’s 2025 inaugural fund, which has collected $239 million. At the same time, David Steiner, a FedEx board member, has been appointed Postmaster General, set to begin in July 2025. This collision of corporate cash and political power demands scrutiny. Can the Postal Service remain a public good under such influence?

The announcement hit like a sudden storm. FedEx’s generous donation aligns too closely with Steiner’s appointment, creating a perception of corporate favoritism. Postal unions, including the National Association of Letter Carriers, have raised urgent concerns, warning that Steiner’s ties to a USPS competitor could tilt the agency toward privatization—a move opposed by 60% of Americans, per recent polls. The Postal Service exists to serve the public, not corporate interests. Why are we allowing a private company’s influence to creep into its leadership?

Supporters of Steiner highlight his success as CEO of Waste Management, where he drove a corporate turnaround. They argue his resignation from FedEx’s board and divestiture of financial interests will eliminate conflicts. Yet, these promises feel inadequate. The revolving door between corporate suites and government offices has long undermined public confidence. Steiner’s appointment signals a broader problem: the growing dominance of corporate agendas in spaces meant to prioritize the common good.

With a projected $160 billion deficit over the next decade, the Postal Service faces immense pressure to modernize. The 2022 Postal Service Reform Act and the Delivering for America plan aim to streamline operations, electrify fleets, and expand parcel services. These changes are essential to maintain universal delivery, particularly in rural areas where private carriers often decline to operate. However, Steiner’s appointment raises doubts about the direction of these reforms. His deep ties to FedEx, a key USPS rival, suggest a potential preference for corporate strategies over public needs.

Postal unions and Democratic lawmakers have voiced strong objections. They fear Steiner’s leadership could favor cost-cutting measures, like network consolidation, that slow rural deliveries and degrade service quality. The National Association of Letter Carriers has labeled his appointment a direct threat, warning it could shift parcel delivery to private firms, eroding the USPS’s core mission. This concern is not about Steiner’s resume; it is about preserving an institution that serves every American, regardless of profit margins.

History amplifies these worries. The 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act imposed a prefunding mandate that fueled deficits, later exploited by privatization advocates. Louis DeJoy, Steiner’s predecessor, faced criticism for holding stakes in USPS contractors, highlighting similar ethical concerns. Steiner’s appointment continues this troubling pattern, where corporate executives assume public roles with baggage that risks prioritizing private gain over public service.

FedEx’s $1 million contribution to Trump’s inaugural fund is no mere gesture; it reflects a broader surge in corporate influence. Since the 2010 Citizens United ruling, corporations have poured billions into elections via PACs, Super PACs, and shadowy dark money groups, with 2024 seeing a record $6 billion in outside spending. These funds secure access, shape policy, and, as this case suggests, influence key appointments. How can we trust that FedEx’s donation and Steiner’s role are unconnected when the pattern of corporate sway is so clear?

Advocates for accountability, including congressional Democrats, are pushing for stringent oversight of Steiner’s tenure. Federal ethics laws, such as 18 U.S.C. §208, mandate divestiture or recusal to prevent conflicts, but enforcement often falls short. The revolving door—where executives like Steiner transition from corporate boards to public roles—has grown, with 21% of federal officeholders now hailing from corporate ranks, up from 14% in 2000. This trend erodes impartiality and fuels distrust. The Postal Service needs leaders free from corporate ties.

Some defend Steiner’s appointment, arguing that business executives bring efficiency to struggling agencies. House Republicans praise Steiner’s private-sector expertise, claiming it will bolster the USPS’s finances while preserving universal service. They view conflict-of-interest concerns as exaggerated, citing his planned divestitures. Yet, this perspective overlooks the subtle ways corporate influence shapes priorities, often at the expense of public welfare.

The Postal Service is a cornerstone of democracy, ensuring equal access to essential services. Its universal mission, enshrined in the 1970 Postal Reorganization Act, demands unwavering protection. Steiner’s appointment, paired with FedEx’s inaugural donation, threatens to steer this institution toward corporate control. We must reject this trajectory and recommit to a Postal Service that serves all 330 million Americans.

Congressional Democrats and postal unions are rightly calling for stronger ethics rules, extended cooling-off periods for corporate executives, and limits on corporate political spending. These measures are critical to restoring public trust. The Postal Service’s modernization must focus on service quality, not profit, ensuring rural communities and underserved groups remain connected.

The American public deserves a Postal Service untainted by corporate agendas. Steiner’s appointment challenges us to act. Will we allow corporate influence to reshape a vital public institution, or will we demand leadership that upholds the public good? Our response will determine whether the Postal Service remains a beacon of equity or falls prey to private interests.