[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 76 (Tuesday, May 25, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1079]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   THE MAILBOX PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 25, 1999

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce H.J. Res. 55, the Mailbox 
Privacy Protection Act, a joint resolution disapproving a Postal 
Service Regulation which tramples on the privacy of the two million 
Americans who rent mailboxes from Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies. 
Under this regulation, any American currently renting, or planning to 
rent, a commercial mailbox will have to provide the receiving agency 
with personal information, including two items of valid identification, 
one of which must contain a photograph of the applicant and one of 
which must contain a ``serial number--traceable to the bearer.'' Of 
course, in most cases that number will be today's de facto national ID 
number--the Social Security number.
  The receiving agency must then send the information to the Post 
Office, which will maintain the information in a database. Furthermore, 
the Post Office authorizes the Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies to 
collect and maintain photocopies of the forms of identification 
presented by the box renter. My colleagues might be interested to know 
that the Post Office is prohibited from doing this by the Privacy Act 
of 1974. I hope my colleagues are as outraged as I am by the Post 
Office's mandating that their competitors do what Congress has 
forbidden the Post Office to do directly.
  Thanks to the Post Office's Federal Government-granted monopoly on 
first-class delivery service, Americans cannot receive mail without 
dealing with the Postal Service. Therefore, this regulation presents 
Americans who wish to receive mail at a Commercial Mail Receiving 
Agency with a choice: either provide the federal government with your 
name, address, photograph and social security number, or surrender the 
right to receive communications from one's fellow citizens in one's 
preferred manner.
  This regulation, ironically, was issued at the same time the Post 
Office was issuing a stamp honoring Ayn Rand, one of the twentieth 
century's greatest champions of liberty. Another irony connected to 
this regulation is that it comes at a time when the Post Office is 
getting into an ever increasing number of enterprises not directly 
related to mail delivery. So, while the Postal Service uses its 
monopoly on first-class mail to compete with the private sector, it 
works to make life more difficult for its competitors in the field of 
mail delivery.
  This regulation also provides the Post Office with a list of all 
those consumers who have opted out of the Post Office's mailbox 
service. Mr. Speaker, what business in America would not leap at the 
chance to get a list of their competitor's customer names, addresses, 
social security numbers, and photographs? The Post Office could even 
mail advertisements to those who use private mail boxes explaining how 
their privacy would not be invaded if they used a government box.
  Coincidentally, this regulation will also raise the operating cost on 
the Post Office's private competitors for private mailbox services. 
Some who have examined this bill estimate that it could impose costs as 
high as $1 billion on these small businesses during the initial six-
month compliance period. The long-term costs of this rule are 
incalculable, but could conceivably reach several billion dollars in 
the first few years. This may force some of these businesses into 
bankruptcy.
  During the rule's comment period, more than 8,000 people formally 
denounced the rule, while only 10 spoke generally favor of it. However, 
those supporting this rule will claim that the privacy of the majority 
of law-abiding citizens who use commercial mailboxes must be sacrificed 
in order to crack down on those using commercial mailboxes for criminal 
activities. However, I would once again remind my colleagues that the 
Federal role in crime, even if the crime is committed in ``interstate 
commerce,'' is a limited one. The fact that some people may use a 
mailbox to commit a crime does not give the Federal Government the 
right to treat every user of a commercial mailbox as a criminal. 
Moreover, my office has received a significant number of calls from 
battered women who use these boxes to maintain their geographic 
privacy.
  I have introduced this joint resolution in hopes that it will be 
considered under the expedited procedures established in the Contract 
with America Advancement Act of 1996. This procedure allows Congress to 
overturn onerous regulations such as the subject of this bill. Mr. 
Speaker, the entire point of this procedure to provide Congress with a 
means to stop federal actions which pose an immediate threat to the 
rights of Americans. Thanks to these agency review provisions, Congress 
cannot hide and blame these actions on the bureaucracy. I challenge my 
colleagues to take full advantage of this process and use it to stop 
this outrageous rule.
  In conclusion Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in 
cosponsoring the Mailbox Privacy Protection Act, which uses the Agency 
Review Procedures of the Contract with America Advancement Act to 
overturn Post Office's regulations requiring customers of private 
mailboxes to give the Post Office their name, address, photographs and 
social security number. The Federal Government should not force any 
American citizen to divulge personal information as the price for 
receiving mail. I further call on all my colleagues to assist me in 
moving this bill under the expedited procure established under the 
Congressional Review Act.




                          ____________________