[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 4 (Monday, January 9, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E58]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     THE POSTAL PRIVACY ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                          HON. GARY A. CONDIT

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Monday, January 9, 1995

  Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Speaker, I have today introduced the Postal Privacy 
Act of 1995. This legislation is intended to protect the privacy of 
each U.S. resident who files a change of address notice with the U.S. 
Postal Service.
  Few people are aware that when they change their address, the Postal 
Service makes the information public through a program called national 
change of address [NCOA] NCOA has about 25 licenses--including many 
large direct mail companies--who receive all new addresses and sell 
address correction services to mailers. If you give your new address to 
the Postal Service, it can be distributed to thousands of mailers. When 
people ask ``How did they get my new address?'', the answer may be that 
it came from the Postal Service. People who want their mail forwarded--
and who doesn't?--have no choice. File a change of address notice and 
your name and new address will be sold.
  NCOA is a reasonable program because it saves the Postal Service and 
the mailing community money by making everyone more efficient. I 
support NCOA, but it needs one small change. People who file a change 
of address should be given a choice. They should have the option of 
having their mail forwarded without having their name and address sold 
to the world of direct mail advertisers. This is what the Postal 
Privacy Act of 1995 will do. It will give people a choice. It will not 
end the NCOA program.
  Who might be concerned about keeping a new address private? Anyone 
who has fled an abusive spouse does not want the Postal Service giving 
out a new address. An individual who files a change of address notice 
on behalf of a deceased relative will not want the new address sold. 
Imagine sorting through the affairs of a deceased family member only to 
receive a mound of unwanted mail offering new products and services to 
that family member. Jurors in highly visible trials, public figures, 
and others may have a special need for privacy as might elderly people 
who may be more vulnerable to unwanted solicitations.
  The bottom line is that everyone should have a choice about how his 
or her name and address is made available to others. You don't have to 
have a justification. It should be your decision. The Postal Service 
should not make this decision for you.
  Recently, the Postal Service announced that it would provide some 
protection to individuals who have court orders protecting them against 
spousal abuse. This is a small step in the right direction, but it is 
not enough. It only protects those who have gone to the trouble and 
expense of obtaining a court order. Everyone should be entitled to the 
same option, but without the need for a court order. The Postal Service 
has demonstrated that it is possible to provide protection to people 
selectively. I want to extend the option to everyone.
  There is nothing new about giving consumers a choice. The Direct 
Marketing Association has been a strong supporter of opt-out procedures 
which give individuals a choice about what type of mail they receive. 
The association supports its own a mail preference service that offers 
consumers an option. There is no reason why the Postal Service cannot 
do the same thing.
  The Postal Privacy Act of 1995 is based on work done by the 
Government Operations Committee. Those who seek more information about 
NCOA should read ``Give Consumers A Choice: Privacy Implications of 
U.S. Postal Service National Change of Address Program'' (House Rept. 
102-1067).

                          ____________________