[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 4945-4946]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         POSTAL SERVICE REFORM

  (Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to 
address the House for 1 minute.)
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on April 4, the postal 
service transmitted its ``Transformation Plan'' to Congress. I read 
through some of the report and was surprised that there was no mention 
of the fact that the postal service spent $55 million on general 
advertising in 2001.
  The report did, however, stress that the postal service needs more 
``flexibility'' and cited ``increasing cost burdens'' and ``significant 
fixed costs'' as part of the problem.
  Now, why on earth is an organization who whines about ``burdens'' and 
``fixed costs'' spending $55 million on brand promotion? Remember, this 
money was spent during the same year it lost more than $1 billion.
  Mr. Speaker, the $55 million the postal service spent on advertising 
for

[[Page 4946]]

product lines which typically lose money could clearly have been spent 
more efficiently. For example, $55 million would have just about 
covered all of the postal service's tax liability on leased facilities 
last year. Even better, $55 million would have paid for more than two-
thirds of the postal service employee wages in my district.
  Mr. Speaker, an agency which spends $55 million on a losing 
advertising campaign does not need ``flexibility.'' No, Mr. Speaker. 
What the postal service needs is some old fashioned ``accountability.''

                          ____________________