Identity Theft Made Easy by the USPS

Did you know that your US mail may be diverted by anyone at any time to any location of their choosing?  A child can do it.

The United States Postal Service was created in 1971 by the Postal Reorganization Act.  This change eliminated the old Post Office Department.  While the act was meant to improve the postal service so that it would function more like a business, the USPS is still a government organization.  As such, it suffers much from the same bureaucratic ills of any government entity.

While much of their business functions with relative efficiency, i.e., the mail gets delivered, there is at least one area that is in serious need of overhaul.  That area of concern is the Official Mail Forwarding Change of Address Order, or PS Form 3575 to be more precise.  This simple form measures roughly 5” X 7” and has 10 basic line items.  It shouldn’t take more than a couple of minutes to complete by any legitimate citizen or thief.  The postage is prepaid by the Post Office.

Change of Address Post Card

While the USPS requires validation in the form of a minimal bank charge for an online address change, the paper post card version has no verification process.  Therein lies the problem, anyone can complete the form.  There is no verification of the signature placed on the form.  No identification is required.  Any individual can divert your mail to any location of their choosing with barely two minutes of effort.  Think about that.  Your credit cards, financial statements, bills, investment information, social security correspondence, banking information, tax returns, personal correspondence, personal information, medical information, medications, and packages can all be sent to anyone anywhere with the stroke of a pen, or pencil for that matter.

This can be done by anyone to anyone.  You just need the name and address of a person and you can send their mail anywhere you want.  Scammers don’t have to risk showing up at a post office and the change is almost immediate.

The USPS does mail a form letter to your address notifying you of the address change.  This may arrive after your mail has been diverted.  If you do receive this notification, and realize it is an important document, you are directed to call 1-800-ASK-USPS if you didn’t authorize the redirection of your mail.

It's Comforting to Know That the Postal Inspectors Still Ride Horses

There are two problems with this.  That notification phone number, when I called, estimated my wait time to be just over an hour.  The second more serious problem is that the notice looks like junk mail.  Mine was literally stuffed with advertising much of which was related to my “recent move.”  There were fliers for hauling services, car insurance, life insurance, DirctTV, Lowe’s, and Xfinity.  With so much crap stuffed in one envelope, it would be easy to miss the “flier” from the USPS Change of Address Security Division.  I'm sure the USPS makes a few advertising dollars with this part of the venture, but is it worth the risk?

Junk Mail, Your Change of Address Notification May Be In Here

Identity theft is one of the fastest growing crimes in America and the USPS is still using a 1950’s mentality with the Honor System.  In 2016, the cost of identity theft has been estimated at 16 billion dollars and it affected over 15 million people.

Simple changes in USPS policies and procedures would go a long way to either solving the problem or at least make life more difficult for thieves.  My recommendations for change are as follows:

• Eliminate the post card Change of Address Order.  Keep the form but require that it be hand delivered to a postal facility where identification must be provided and recorded.

•  Modify the form so that the signature line clearly states that fraudulent filings are subject to fines and up to 5 years imprisonment.  The current “see conditions on reverse” statement is not sufficient.

•  Modify the form to require a telephone number or an email address.  Individuals who have neither would delay the activation of the change until a notification letter has been mailed to the original address.

• The Postal Service should allow anyone to "lock down" their mailing address with personal information like a copy of authorized signatures, passwords or pin numbers, verifying phone numbers and/or email addresses.  Requests for change of locked accounts would require validation of the request using the provided information. 

•  Remove all advertising fliers and clutter from the Change of Address notification.  Mark it clearly as An Important Document from the United States Postal Service.

•  When evidence of a fraudulent Change of Address is discovered, both the legitimate and the bogus address postal carriers and annexes should be notified immediately.  The illegitimate location should take steps to prevent errant delivery.

In the 1950’s there were but a few credit cards in use, the Internet had not been invented, and home computers did not exist.  Identity theft was not the epidemic it is today.  In the 1950’s a post card change of address form made sense.  In the 21^st Century however, the Honor System represented by the USPS’ use of an unverified process for redirecting critical personal information, is an abhorrent decision.

While the above listed recommendations for change may involve a level of inconvenience for a few, a loss of advertising revenue for the USPS, and bit of extra work, the alternative is the continued exploitation of vulnerable individuals by criminals.  The grief and consternation caused by the theft of your personal information is reason enough to put up with the minor inconvenience of these recommended changes.  It is high time to correct this flaw in the system.

America, Land of the Free; Not So Much

Our founding fathers had a good idea and put together a set of documents outlining our new government.  They did however make a few mistakes.  If for a moment we can put aside the fact that a group of men decided that all men were free, while many of these men were slaveholders, we can address another of their grievous errors.  That mistake deals with freedom of religion.

The United States Constitution is mostly devoid of references to religion.  It merely touches on religion in Article VI where it prohibits religious scrutiny in order to hold public office.  Nice in theory but in modern practice professed atheists or others with less than mainstream religious backgrounds (read, Christian) need not apply.  Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and William Taft were accused of being atheists.  Dwight D. Eisenhower was raised as a Mennonite but abandoned that religion and was baptized as a Presbyterian prior to his first term.  John F. Kennedy was challenged for his Catholic faith.  Barack Obama, a Christian, was accused of being a Muslim and an atheist.

Freedom of religion was not seriously addressed until the 1789 adoption of the First Amendment to the Constitution (actually this was the third amendment proposed but One and Two were not adopted so number Three moved to the head of the class), which reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

We would have been better served by a policy of freedom FROM religion, not freedom OF religion.  Such an edict would have allowed individuals and groups to practice and believe anything they wanted so long as those beliefs were not imposed, in any form or fashion, on others.  Reasonable interpretations of such a written policy would have made it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to force prayer into schools, government assemblies, and other policy decisions.  President Eisenhower would have found it difficult to adopt “In God We Trust” as the nation’s official motto and dictate that it be printed on all US paper currency.  It should be noted here that this phrase had been on US coinage since the Civil War.

If you think all of these issues were settled by the Supreme Court ages ago, think again.  As this is being written in April of 2017, the State of Florida legislature is again considering legislation (SB 436) to bring prayer back to schools.  The bill is titled, "Florida Student and School Personnel Religious Liberties Act."  Even in the title, the writers are attempting to hide their intent with wording that would lead you to believe it is merely a reinforcement of established freedoms.  

The drafters of this bill are meticulously trying to structure a new law to avoid conflicts with the Constitution and previous Supreme Court decisions.  Their motivation is clear, they want religion and prayer back in our schools and government, even if they have to “tolerate” other beliefs.  What they fail to address is the fact that no person or student should be held in a place or forced to even hear the expression of the religious beliefs of others.  If I have a right to an education, and elect to attend a public school, I should not be forcibly subjected to the influences of any person's religious beliefs.

We already have parochial schools, private schools, and school vouchers that would allow students to attend an institution catering to their religious wants and needs.  While I object to the use of tax dollars to support religious schools, the mere fact that they currently exist would question the need for a further erosion of our supposed separation of church and state.  I have no problem with free speech when it is truly free.  By this I mean, anyone should be entitled to express an opinion in a forum where that opinion can be challenged and debated.  Such is the foundation of higher learning.

It should not be governmental policy however, that a student body be forcibly subjected to religious indoctrination, by way of the expression of the religious beliefs of others, in a school setting.  Even the process where religious opinions are proffered as subjects for debate, such debates would have no place in our lower grade levels.  Elementary school children are not yet well equipped to challenge these opinions.  These children would be subjected to adult belief systems if this legislation were to pass.

In our current fact challenged society, we do not need a furtherance of unchallengeable opinions, expressed as religious beliefs, to confuse our impressionable students.  Facts such as evolution should be taught as science where the proof can be shown.  The scientifically provable fact that the earth is well beyond the Bible’s 6,000 years in age, is established.  Anyone who wishes to challenge such facts needs to express more than mere opinion.  It is not sufficient to state, I read it in the Bible, or the Talmud states, or the Koran says, or I heard on Fox News that something is true.  Come up with your scientific proof or be able to admit yours is just an opinion and that it may not be true.


Wording in the Florida bill states that it is, "authorizing a student to pray or engage in religious activities or expression; authorizing a student to organize prayer groups, religious clubs, and other religious gatherings" and it further prevents school personnel from preventing such activities.

These “good Florida Christians” in public office should weigh the potential for disruption that would be inherent in their proposed legislation.  Do they plan to halt all school activities so devout Muslims can break out their prayer rugs at the appointed times?  Will teachers of varying beliefs be forced to monitor and supervise religious activities of all faiths?  Will atheists be allowed to counter others with their “heresy”?

Keep religion the Hell out of our public schools, if you believe in such a place (Hell, not public schools).

For more on my opinions on religion you may read my blog entry that directly deals with the topic of  religion.