to these libraries and educational institutions would curtain their ability to provide the services for which they exist. This is a matter of deep concern in light of the limited resources and budgetary strictures which libraries and educational institutions throughout the country face at this time. Yet the Postal Service's proposal is intended to saddle educational institutions and libraries with an unnecessary additional problem. The burdens imposed upon users of the Special Rate Fourth Class category proposed by the Postal Service are not offset by any countervailing benefits to the Postal Service or anyone else. It is unquestionably true that the change in the law proposed by the Postal Service would enable it to increase slightly the revenues it receives from the subclass. But, total revenues from Special Rate Fourth Class Mail constitute only a fraction-less than 10 percent-of the Postal Service's budget; and the increased revenues resulting from the change urged by the Postal Service will be slight. Thus, the abrogation of Section 3683 will not in any meaningful respect resolve the financial difficulties in which the Postal Service finds itself. The change will, by contrast, have a profoundly adverse effect upon the dissemination of books and the other educational, cultural and informational materials which constitute the subclass. For these reasons, we believe that Section 3683, in its present form, reflects a sound policy judgment that uniform nationwide rates for books serves a very valid purpose. That Section, and its underlying purpose, reflect a bipartisan consensus. As stated by Senator Mansfield during the Senate debate on Reorganization of the Post Office in 1970: "These uniform rates serve important educational and cultural purposes, insuring that all citizens, libraries, and educational institutions have the same access to these materials, no matter where they may be located." And, as stated by Senator Hugh Scott during the same debate: "The importance of library materials specifically was first recognized when Congress, in the 1920's established, by law, the so-called library rate covering the exchange of library materials between libraries, and between libraries and their patrons. A second special factor for educational materials, started in 1938. applied a nationwide flat rate for books at the same level as that for the editorial content of magazines and newspapers. Under this rate, which has been continued by successive acts of Congress, the buyers of books, educational films, music and other educational and cultural materials, pay the same transportation charges for their purchases, whether they live near the large publishing centers of the east and mid-west, or whether they live in the most remote areas of the continental or off-shore states." We believe that nothing has been shown and nothing exists to warrant the radical, unfounded and ill-advised reversal of this policy as contended for by the Postal Service. Accordingly, we urge you to oppose the proposal of the United States Postal Service to repeal Section 3683 and to retain the uniform rates which now exist for Special Rate Fourth Class Mail. Very truly yours, ALEXANDER HOFFMAN, Chairman, Postal Committee, Association of American Publishers. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, Hon. DAVID N. HENDERSON, Washington, D.C., February 28, 1975. U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN HENDERSON: The International Brotherhood of Teamsters is vitally interested in H.R. 2445, the proposed Postal Reorganization Act Amendments of 1975. Our organization represents over 75,000 workers in the package delivery industry; and many of these people are employed by United Parcel Service (UPS). In that connection, we support the earlier statement to the Committee by Mr. Charles Foreman of United Parcel Service (UPS). In addition, we would supplement those comments with our observations on the bill. At the outset, we are in general agreement with the approach of H.R. 2445, and with certain modifications this bill should be enacted into law. In that connection, our views will be confined to major areas of the bill regarding: (1) Increasing the independence of the Postal Rate Commission (PRC); (2) Accountability of the Postal Service; (3) Removal of PRC proceedings from the provisons of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA); (4) Proper use of subsidies; and (5) Interpretation of the private express statutes. I. INCREASED INDEPENDENCE OF PRC The PRC should serve as more than a mere depository of divergent points of view on postal rates. That is, we believe the independence of PRC is well-suited to inquire into and amend the rates established by the Postal Service. Thus, we agree with the UPS suggestion that the Commission be authorized to alter temporary rate increases by the Postal Service. Moreover, we would urge removal of the present veto power that the Board of Governors of the Postal Service has over decisions of the PRC. Continuation of the present structure will only serve to undermine the present proposed functions of the Commission. II. ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE POSTAL SERVICE In addition, we would suggest granting the Postal Rate Commission the power to inquire into the accounting methods of the Postal Service. Although we believe this power exists under the terms of the present law, it is our opinion that this matter should be clarified via statutory language because there appears to be a certain reluctance on the part of Postal Service to comply with the request of the Commission in this regard. Finally, if the grant is more explicit, it will ensure relief from the charge that the Postal Service has used less than objective standards in accounting for its subsidies. To implement our suggestion, we would insert the term, "and accounting practices" after "of postal management" on page 6, line 18 of the bill. III. REMOVAL OF PRC PROCEEDINGS FROM APA We believe the Committee should reconsider the provisions of H.R. 2445 that would remove the proceedings of the Postal Rate Commission from the provi sions of the Administrative Procedure Act. Besides the uncertainty that would result from such action, overall effective Government requires uniformity rather than diversity in the decision-making process. For example, Senators Kennedy and Mathias recently introduced a number of bills, S. 796-S. 800, that are designed to prune, in the words of Senator Mathias, the "thicket of uncertainty" in Administrative law. Thus, we would urge continued coverage under the APA. IV. PROPER USE OF SUBSIDIES We endorse those provisions of the bill, especially Section 2, which would terminate the practice of apparent subsidy misuses. Like UPS, we believe the terms of the present law should be adhered to in this regard. Each class of mail should recover its own costs. At the present time, it appears as though parcel post users are being subsidized through overchanges of first class mail users-which includes 2.5 million Teamsters and their families. Under the terms of Section 2(b) (2), the practice of interclass subsidy would cease and for that reason we endorse it. V. INTERPRETATION OF PRIVATE EXPRESS STATUTES Under the current provisions of the Act the Postal Service has the authority to define its monopoly powers. When one considers the fact that competition is often praised by those who have none, the need for changing the present law becomes obvious. We believe the Committee recognizes this need and has provided a Congressional definition of the monopoly in Section 11. This provision, together with the proposed removal of the Postal Service's interpretive authority to the PRC, will provide a more realistic framework for determining who shall compete with the Postal Service. In summary, then, we support the overall approach of H.R. 2445 and by implementing the suggestions outlined above, improvements in Postal Legislation will result. Finally, we would ask that these comments be made a part of the record in these proceedings. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. FRANK E. FITZSIMMONS, General President. Hon. JAMES M. HANLEY, LAW OFFICES CHAPMAN, DUFF AND LENZINI, Chairman, Subcommittee on Postal Service, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. HANLEY: On behalf of the International Association of Game, Fish and Conservation Commissioners (IAGFCC) and the American Association for Conservation Information (AACI) I hereby request that this statement be included in the record in connection with hearings on H.R. 2445, Postal Reorganization Act Amendments of 1975. IAGFCC is a voluntary, nonprofit association whose government membership includes the fish and wildlife agencies of all fifty states; AACI is a nonprofit corporation whose membership includes conservation information personnel of state conservation agencies. Forty-three states publish conservation magazines. (A listing of such publications is set forth in the Attachment hereto.) These publications qualify for second class regular rates based on weight and delivery zones. They do not now qualify for "preferred" second class rates which Congress has extended to certain qualified non-profit organizations. During the course of deliberations by the Subcommittee on H.R. 2445, we urge that that bill be amended to extend preferred second class mail rates to state conservation publications as proposed in identical bills introduced in the 94th Congress by Mr. Ford and approximately fifty cosponsors (H.R. 2813, H.R. 3582, H.R. 3583, H.R. 4065). As set forth in the information which follows, the amendments to section 3626 of title 39, United States Code, proposed by the Ford bill (1) would remedy the existing situation wherein state conservation magazines, which almost without exception do not benefit from advertising revenue, are mailed at the same rate utilized by commercial magazines, and (2) would update legislation enacted in 1962 so as to extend preferred second class rates to a class of magazines published by states which has taken on increasing importance. 1. Background. In 1951 Congress extended preferred rates for certain secondclass and third-class mail when mailed by qualified non-profit organizations including "religious, educational, scientific, philanthropic, agricultural, labor, veterans or fraternal organizations not organized for profit." §§ 2, 3, Pub. L. 82-233, 65 Stat. 672-73 (1951). From the outset the Post Office Department interpreted this provision as not extending the special rates to second-class mail when mailed by governmental bodies. In 1962 Congress amended the definition of "qualified non-profit organizations" eligible for preferred second class rates to include "one publication published by the official highway agency of a State.” § 104(b), Pub. L. 87–793, 76 Stat. 832–33 (1962). In 1967 Congress again amneded the definition of "qualified non-profit organization" to include a “development agency of a State." § 104 (a) (2), Pub. L. 90-206, 81 Stat. 617 (1967). However, a State is limited by existing law to receiving preferred second class rates for only one publication published by either the official highway or development agency. Such publication may contain no advertising. 2. Role of State Conservation Magazines. Since postal legislation in this area was last amended by Congress there has been a dramatic surge of popular concern for the quality of the environment, for conservation of fish and wildlife, for saving from degradation wilderness areas, wild rivers and other relatively undisturbed areas of this nation. These popular attitudes have been reflected also in the significant increase of interest in outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing, back packing, bird watching, nature study and the general enjoyment of open space. State conservation publications which reflect and nuture this interest play a key role as dispassionate spokesmen for people's concerns. In the past decade the circulation of these magazines has more than doubled and possibly tripled. Such circulation, now about 20 million units annually, represents paid circulation with only minor exception, thus testifying to the growing importance which the citizens of these states attach to the matters treated in these magazines. The prospect for the next several years is that the circulaion of these magazines will continue to grow, fulfilling even broader responsibilities to the people of their states. Among these broader responsibilities is the search for alternate sources of energy, careful land use planning, pollution control and similar problems to which these magazines are more and more addressing themselves. In short, state conservation magazines as a bloc are becoming the voices of the states wtih respect to the quality of life. 3. State Highway and Development Agencies. Present Federal law allows either a state "highway" agency or a state "development" agency to make use of preferred (non-profit) second-class postal rates for mailing their periodicals. However, remarkably few state highway and development, agencies utilize preferred second class postal privileges, and many states do not even publish periodicals of this character. (A listing of such agency publications is set forth in the Attachment.) With respect to state highway agency publications, twenty-six states do not publish and twenty-two states publish magazines, newsletters or house organs, all of which travel by third class bulk rate. Of the remaining two states, Arizona Highways utilizes the preferred second class rate and South Carolina Highways utilizes a special Controlled Category Second Class Rate. For development agencies, thirty-one states publish magazines but only two of these publications, Alabama Development News and Vermont Life, utilize the preferred second class rate. We point out the foregoing not to argue that preferred rates extended to state highway and development agencies should be withdrawn or limited in any way but rather to point up the relative importance that states appear to place on such magazines vis-a-vis conservation magazines. 4. Postage Is Borne By the Fish and Game Fund. At present, state conservation magazines are mailed at the same rate utilized by commercial magazines. Almost invariably, however, the state agency magazines are published without the benefit of advertising revenue (of the forty-three states only three state conservation magazines accept advertising) and the burden of postage constitutes a charge to the fish and game fund which represents revenues available from hunter's and angler's license sales. The charges for preferred second-class rates, which are extended under present law to one of two state agencies, either the highway department or development agency, are approximately half of those for regular second-class. For example, mailing charges for an issue of Michigan Natural Resources, mailing 100,000 pieces at regular second-class rates, are approximately $2400. At the preferred rate, the magazine would have paid about $1200. Were preferred rates available, these savings to the fish and game fund could be directed toward wildlife restoration programs. It is estimated that annual savings for all state conservation magazines would approximate $300,000 at existing rates. For the reasons set forth it is urged that the Subcommittee rectify the existing situation by accepting as an amendment to H.R. 2445 the amendatory provisions of H.R. 2813, H.R. 3582, H.R. 3583, and H.R. 4065, identical bills. Respectfully submitted, PAUL A. LENZINI, Attorney for International Association of Game, Fish and Conservation Attachment |