The Mail Animus

March 2, 1992

To satisfy my curiosity, during February, I kept a log of the number and kind of unsolicited mail I received, some of which can deservedly called “junk.” Not counting fliers from local department stores and supermarkets, 106 pieces were received in the shortest month of the year. If I am average, and there are, say, 200 million households in the USA, a rough estimate of unsolicited mail adds up to more than my calculator can handle, but my rough multiplication makes the total of over three billion in one month in our nation.

In my curmudgeon mind, this deluge provokes a few questions and observations:

How many forests had to be pulped to provide this paper blizzard?

The U.S. Post Office loses huge monies every year. Most of the unsolicited mail is delivered at the bulk rate: 5¢, 7¢, 13¢, etc. Could not the U.S. Post Office easily reach at least a breakeven point by charging the first class rate on all mail? Have the costs of bulk mail handling compared to first class mail ever been published by the post-office? A 29¢ stamp on the letters I write and the checks I mail does not ruin me. But I do have a certain resentment that mail I do not solicit is delivered “on the cheap” for the organizations peddling causes, merchandise, insurance, magazines, politics, and sundry other offers. To alleviate the Post Office deficit, why not a switch? Require solicitors to pay first class mail rates; and allow me to send mail at the lower rates. I would be willing to add to my answer, IF I respond, the 29¢ additional cost that the solicitor incurred.

In keeping with my limited resources, I have supported many causes: civil rights, the political party in which I am registered (not lately, but that’s another story), certain health and research programs, journal subscriptions which I may or may not renew, etc. I have bought items from catalogs, but far fewer than the many catalogs I receive. So it is no mystery to me that my name is on so many mailing lists.

There is another doubt which occurs to me frequently: How much of my contribution goes goes to the cause, however worthy it claims to be? In a recent article in THE LEDGER (2/3/92), Denise Kalette provides some pertinent data:

“Keep in mind that nearly one in four of the most popular charities doesn’t meet Better Business standards.

“Stakes are high: in 1990, charitable contributions totaled about $122 billion.

“Among groups that fail Better Business standards: Child Protection Program/Christian Action Network Foundation, Christian Broadcasting Network/700 Club, Jewish National Fund, National Awareness Foundation, Southwest Indian Foundation.”

Among the reasons for not meeting standards were failure to provide an account of where the the funds go, violations of rules on pay, violations of spending guidelines, failure of proper accountability. Many fund-raising organizations did not respond to requests for full disclosure. I have read elsewhere that of the total money received, 50% to 80% is used up in fund-raising costs in some organizations.

So, let’s be selective in our generosity. I believe I’m as concerned as the next guy, but I also try to remember a Henny Youngman one-liner, “Why do reformers always want THEIR conscience to be YOUR guide?”

There is a Better Business index of charities available for $10.95 (I’m sending for it). The IRS list of tax-exempt charitable groups is available at IRS offices. Being tax-exempt, however, does NOT indicate that a given organization meets proper accountability standards.

More careful discrimination in what causes to support may cost the jobs of some copy-writers, graphic designers, telephone fund-raisers, computer operators, charity executives. But they do not merit more consideration than laid-off teachers, auto workers, engineers and the thousands of other persons in the professions, trades, and other occupations.

Let YOUR conscience and YOUR judgment be your guides.