Postmaster General John E. "Jack" Potter was one of the first officials to welcome the new law governing the United States Postal Service when President George W. Bush signed it Dec. 20, 2006. 
    But in a March 1 speech, the nation's 72 nd postmaster general made clear that he has some serious concerns about how the Postal Service will operate under the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. 
    "What the law lays out for the Postal Service is not an easy lift by any stretch of the imagination," Potter declared at a panel discussion in Washington. 
    Others painted an optimistic view of how the legislation will free the Postal Service from some of its past legislative shackles. 
    But Potter came to the meeting, sponsored by American University, with a message of caution. Three times he repeated his warning about the difficulties the Postal Service will face under the law. 
    "It's a huge opportunity, but one that's not easy," he said. Potter urged mailers not to expect too many quick changes as a result of the new law. It is the most sweeping change to postal law since Congress transformed the old U.S. Post Office Department into the independent U.S. Postal Service in 1971. 
    "I'm not going to go into a lot of detail other than to say that this law is going to bring about a lot of change," Potter declared. 
    Quoting PresidentWoodrow Wilson, he told the gathering that, "Change is difficult . . . change in moderation works." 
    Potter's obvious wariness about what the new law will do to the organization where he has worked for nearly 30 years contrasted with the upbeat presentations of former Postal Service board chairman S. David Fineman of Philadelphia and Dan G. Blair, the chairman of the newly named Postal Regulatory Commission. 
    Blair pledged his organization would be "the rational regulator" of mail services. "This is a brave new world for the commission," he said. 
    Fineman credited the new law largely to the mailing industry, not the Postal Service: Those people "worked very, very hard" and "just kept pushing and pushing." 
    The Postal Service opposed the bill, but its influence on Capitol Hill, the former chairman suggested, was minimal. 
    "I think there was a perception that the Postal Service was a 3,000-pound gorilla and was a little bit arrogant." 
    Both Fineman and Michael J. Critelli, chairman and chief executive officer of Pitney Bowes Inc., were optimistic about how the new law will be implemented. "It's going to go forward in a reasonable way and a way that will best serve the American public," said Fineman. 
    "Staying where we were was not an option," said Critelli. 
    Potter fondly recalled the 1970 act that produced the U.S. Postal Service as "a tremendous success." But he conceded that the business model on which it was built had collapsed. 
    Potter said that the Postal Service could no longer count on rising mail volume to offset its rising expenses: "That model, simply stated, is broken. Why? Because we are bringing less mail to every door." 
    Potter did not offer any detailed critique about what worries him about the new law. He did cite the provision that it should manage each class of mail separately, something he said postal officials have never done. 
    He warned that some mail industry standards for addresses and bar codes will be raised: "We have to do this because of the bar that's been set and this bar is high." 
    He expressed concern about "do not mail list" legislation pending in about 10 state legislatures. The legislation is aimed at advertising mail, which has become a mainstay of postal revenues. 
    "I'm bullish about the mail," Potter continued. "I'm not saying we cannot be successful going forward." 
    He added, however, that the future of the mail might now be in the hands of Dan Blair, head of the newly empowered Postal Regulatory Commission. 
    Fineman had seen it differently than Potter and Blair. He predicted, "they're going to be joined at the hip going forward."