Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!usa-post Newsgroups: usa-today.issues,americast.usa-today.issues From: usa-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: usa-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: issues Wed, Sep 30 1992 Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 04:52:36 EDT Message-ID: 09-30 0000 DECISIONLINE: Issues & Debate USA TODAY Update Sept. 30, 1992 Source: USA TODAY:Gannett National Information Network Here are some of the issues and topics being debated across the nation Wednesday morning in USA TODAY: Mailings, Ross Perot. TODAY'S DEBATE - POLITICAL MAILINGS: USA TODAY'S OPINION: Chances are, your congressman is one of your most faithful correspondents. Don't feel too special. House members sent 287 million pieces of mail last year, three per household, all at taxpayer expense, according to a USA TODAY:Gannett News Service study. This is out of hand. House members spend six times more than senators on mail per constituent. There would be no problem if these missives did a public service. Most don't. Too many ... are just thinly veiled campaign pitches. Newsletters mailed to an entire district do little but boost members' images. "Personal" letters targeted to groups mined from mailing lists create only an illusion of individual attention. Free campaign mail is an advantage non-incumbent candidates don't enjoy, and it shouldn't be funded by taxpayers. Fortunately, there are ways to control it without inhibiting constituent service: Bring the House mail budget more into line with Senate limits, and tighten up the rules governing political content. Label mail "Printed and mailed at taxpayer expense." ... Ban mail targeted only to registered voters, a clear campaign ploy. Extend the time that mass mailings can't be sent; now, they're not allowed within 60 days of a primary or election. Allow constituents to send mail free to their representatives. Chances are slim that these ideas could survive a House vote without public pressure behind them. That kind of input has helped bring about the few existing curbs on congressional mailing. So let your congressman know what you think about curbing tax-paid mail. You'll probably get a letter back. OTHER VIEW: PAUL DONNELLY, a Hyattsville, Md., writer and former legislative assistant and press secretary to members of Congress: A subversive dislike of republican government hides inside the self-righteous critics of Congress. Sure, congressional free mass mailings are a competitive advantage that incumbents exploit. But it won't make elections competitive to deny voters information. Can you think of a better way to judge your Congress than by what it sends you at your own expense? There are already sensible limits to free mailings - less than the equivalent of three stamps per household per year, no closer than 60 days to an election, no using contributor lists, and so on. ... But banning is no answer. Campaign contributions already pay for targeted mailings about what a great leader congressman so-and-so is, getting the government off our backs by championing the Hypocrisy Deregulation Bill, or whatever. Congressional mass mailings are intended to be different, and while they range from the blatantly self-serving to the chatty, to hard facts and helpful hints, most do contain a lot more information about the range of a member's activities than is available in your local newspaper or on TV. Of course, it's targeted to voters' interests. ... When you get political junk mail, just remember - if it's mailed with a signature instead of a stamp, you paid for it. Was it worth the money? If not, throw it out. But don't stop there. Go vote Nov. 3 and throw out the clown who sent it to you. ... I remember the voter who told my home state's largest newspaper in an earlier wave of scandal about free mailings: "It don't bother me. I don't even know if I'm gonna vote for the guy. But the way I figure it, I'm worth a few stamps." VOICES ACROSS THE NATION ON WHY ROSS PEROT IS CONSIDERING THE RACE: COPPELL, Texas, Cecil Taber, 40, insurance broker: He's considering re-entering because he wants to get the country back on track. I believe he will run. The economy is a main issue, and the United States needs a candidate who has a plan that will allow the country to compete in a world economy. KANSAS CITY, Mo., Ernestine Gordon, 60, truancy worker: President Bush has done something to make him mad, and Perot is toying with him. I wish he'd just go somewhere and sit down. I hate what he's doing to his volunteers. It's obvious they want him in; why else are they getting all those signatures? LARGO, Fla., Ann Nagelschmidt, 35, case manager: I'm really not sure. I don't think he's really come forward with too many good ideas on the issues. His economic plan is too dangerous. The idea of increasing taxes and cutting so many programs is just too drastic. SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Glen Holt, 59, marketing consultant: When he first announced he would run, I thought it was good to have a third candidate. Now I think he is obsessed with hurting President Bush. He has enough money to do this and to toy with the voters. Issues & Debate Editor: Kate Coughlin. (1-919-855-3491) Making copies of USA TODAY Update (Copyright, 1992) for further distribution violates federal law. This article is copyright 1992 Gannett News Service. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM