?: Should taxpayers being paying for a mailer w RW talking points from congress?

[mod mom]

I just received a flyer in the mail from my GOP congressman (I'm in a gerrymandered district) w talking points against the House Majority's Healthcare Plan and there is a notation "This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer's expense." Is this allowed? (I'm really not sure and don't trust this guy to act ethically)

[Atman]

1. It's allowed, and the Democrats do it, too. It's called "franking."

I know -- it's part of what I do for a living. In addition to the usual political advertising, we create mailers and newsletters for Democratic Congressmen and Women just like the one you describe (except for that our agency wins lots of awards for our work!) Every member of Congress is allotted money for "frank mail" to keep in touch with their constituents. It is kind of odd when I add that disclaimer, knowing that part of the paycheck I earn for creating it is also paying for it. But it's perfectly legal. And it helps pay my kid's tuition!

.

[mod mom]

3. Thank you.

:hi:

[tabbycat31]

2. I got one about a month ago from my Democratic congressman

[HopeHoops]

4. When I first lived in NH, Rep Douglas (R) sent a monthly "newsletter".

It was entirely short articles about "How I was like George H.W. Bush this month". It was sent at taxpayer expense. He was solidly defeated by Dick Swett (D) (yes, that was his name), and the ONLY thing I ever got from Rep Swett was a direct response to an issue I had written about. He's also the only member of Congress I've ever had that actually ADDRESSED the issue I wrote about. On top of that, if there was something about it that was relevant to another issue of mine, that would be mentioned in the letter. I was impressed.