I believe that sometimes it is used in a political context, which concerns me a great deal. And I presented three amendments to address this. But I must say that this Congress and this Committee on Rules, and particularly the gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas], have really started to address these issues. And for this I have tremendous praise for them. For example, we have gone from a high in 1988 of $113.4 million for frank mail to free mail, which is sometimes used for political reasons, to a low of $30 million in fiscal year 1995. I am convinced, after discussing this with the gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas], chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, that we are going to try to address even additional areas with respect to this to make sure that our mail is used for the purposes of responding to our constituents and not for mass mail used in a political sense.
On the recordJuly 25, 1997
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing concerns about the use of franking privilege in a political context.
Share
More from Michael Castle
Jun 15, 2009
I worry that we get too far ahead of ourselves sometimes in terms of what is next instead of how to incorporate what is there.
May 11, 2009
As we work to reauthorize No Child Left Behind--and I hope we do that in the next few months or year or so--we must work to ensure that students are prepared for college or the workforce when they graduate.
Feb 25, 2010
Woman, we hope this report can be done relatively soon. The amendment actually allows for 180 days more from this time in order to submit it. We have been in touch with the administration. We know that they're aware of this, and hopefully…





