PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 22, 2009
Access to Postal Services Act - Modifies the procedures the U.S. Postal Service must follow in connection with the closing or consolidation of any postal facility, including: (1) requiring an assessment of the need for the closure or consolidation; (2) eliminating a requirement to consider the resulting Postal Service economic savings; (3) requiring a posting in each affected postal facility at least 90 days before the final decision is made; and (4) requiring (under current law, allowing) suspension of the determination pending an appeal to the Postal Regulatory Commission. Exempts emergency suspensions (as defined under Postal Service regulations) or lease termination or cancellation by a party other than the Postal Service.
Defines "postal facility," for the provisions amended by this Act, to include an office, branch, station, or other facility operated by the Postal Service.
People & committees
Rep. Sires, Albio [D-NJ-13] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.658 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.658 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.658 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.658 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.