How can Dave Reichert afford to pay for so many glossy, full-color mailings, when his campaign is struggling to raise money? Easy… he just passes the cost off to unsuspecting taxpayers:
At first glance, these fliers may look like campaign mailers. But they are produced and mailed at taxpayer expense, using a congressional privilege called “franked mail.”
Most members of Congress use such taxpayer-financed mail to let constituents know what’s happening on Capitol Hill and within their districts. Since his election to Congress in 2004, Reichert has been among the state’s biggest users of franked mail. He spent more on postage than other members of the state’s delegation in 2005 and 2006, according to federal records.
According to the Seattle Times, Reichert ranked second in the state for 2007, racking up a bill of $90,000 to Jay Inslee’s $104,000. But Reichert’s total only includes the cost of postage, whereas Inslee’s report includes the costs of printing and design. (Reichert mailed out 475,000 pieces compared to Inslee’s 171,000.) Anybody who has ever paid to print glossy, double-sided, full-color, 11×17 tri-folds knows that they don’t come cheap, so we’re looking at a total bill to taxpayers of as much as $500,000.
That’s like a half-million dollar campaign contribution from US taxpayers… and that’s just for 2007. Reichert sent out a deluge of franked mail in recent months, ahead of the May 21 cutoff, repeating a pattern of franking abuse he established back in 2006… an “aggressive Franked Mail program” even by his own admission:
Will also oversee and update electronic, internet and other communications, including an aggressive Franked Mail program.
That’s from a March 2007 job ad Reichert ran for a Press Secretary, a job description that curiously included “campaign experience” as a necessary qualification for a staff position that is expressly prohibited by law from engaging in campaign activities. Huh.
Like all Republicans, Reichert likes to fancy himself a fiscal conservative. But when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars on himself he is consistently our state’s most profligate spendthrift.
hi goldy.
open left beat you to the link:)
Big Deal- perhaps if you bothered to look at ALL the piggy-pork Democrats, you’d see that their postage “franking” almost equals the national debt.
@2
Don’t be stupid, the results were in the Times piece.
Great to see this popping up in The Times!
[Deleted…see the HA Comment Policy]
Goldy pulls a half milliion dollar number out of his ass and then expects us to believe it? No chance.
Me think thou doth protesteth too much.
I haven’t been seeing as many pieces this year, but I’m sure Dave will catch up. 2006 was ridiculous. But you know there’s a kind of cottage industry that hs grown up around crafting franked mail pieces that do not run afoul of the law. Dave runs right up the the line but I don’t think he’s brave enough to cross it. I don’t see how all of this law biding squares with his Republicanism.
Whenever I receive his e-mail newsletter, I reply to him that I’m voting against him.
RD @ 6: I’ve been involved in publishing mailing pieces before (mostly for non-profits), and Goldy’s estimate isn’t that far out of line. There is a reason most of a newspaper is printed on newsprint in black & white, using both sides of the paper.
Using tabloid-size glossy paper, four colors, and a tri-fold will bring the printing cost up pretty high. And don’t forget the cost of the layout work.
And you have to pay someone to sort the mail into batches for bulk mailing (I assume large amounts of franked mail follows these same requirements).
Actually, that’s one of my pet peeves when I get those glossy mailers from my local utilities, port districts, water conservation districts, etc. I think they are a waste of money. Anything important could have been said on one side of an 8-1/2 X 11 piece of paper.
“PREFERS DEMOCRAT PARTY” — Top Two filing faux pas:
U.S. Congressional District 3 (Clark*, Cowlitz, Lewis, Pacific*, Skamania*, Thurston*, Wahkiakum)
Representative Partisan office (2 Year Term)
Brian Baird
(Prefers Democrat Party)
PO Box 5584
Vancouver WA 98668 (360) 513-3851
gipsoncindy@gmail.com 6/2/2008
http://wei.secstate.wa.gov/oso.....Filed.aspx
There are a few legislators who are choosing to run as “Prefers Democrat Party” as well. Most self-professed Democrats, of course, are running under the “Prefers Democratic Party” banner.
Several Republicans are running under “Prefers G.O.P. Party”, although most are running under the “Prefers Republican Party” label.
Hopefully, Darcy Burner will choose “Prefers Democratic Party” when she files for office.
But, for now at least, the U.S. House of Representatives has at least one member who openly aligns himself with the “Democrat Party”. Unless, of course, someone made a typo in the Secretary of State’s office.
8 rhp6033
Remember also that the teams who produce these things can win awards for them, which enhances prestige or some such rot. For example, I’ve been in a few competitions with Boeing while working in other companies, and they produce some real purty stuff.
@8…rhp6033…
Nobody tops Sound Transit when it comes to sending out campaign mail disguised as “voter information” pieces.
So…Goldy…when next we all receive another ST piece of fiction, will you condemn your pals over there?
The Piper
What Goldy is missing here is the context.
You have to put Reichert’s level of franking in the context of his extensive legislative activity and accomplishments as a lawmaker. $104k might be enough for a back bencher like Jay Inslee. But a dynamic lawmaker sponsoring lots of legislation and leading major delegations of his fellow lwamakers each session has much more to communicate with his constituents.
Doesn’t he?
I mean, it’s not as though he spends all his time fixing his hair.
Isn’t it?
Anything important could have been said on one side of an 8-1/2 X 11 piece of paper.
Or on a freakin’ website. Franked mail is so 20th Century!
Leave it to Piper to be off topic – sound transit is not using congressional franking priviledges and running for office – so your analogy is …well, moot as usual. Actually, Reichert is using even more money for franking because his total does not include preparation fees – and Inslee’s does (note that Inslee actually mailed one fifth of what Reichert sent out).
What I love is the small government republican hypocrites who waste more of my tax money on their propaganda. Especially Reichert who voted against the vet GI bill and sent out a glossy flier on how he “supports” veterans or the one on how he is an “environmentalist” – when we now know how he manipulated his votes when it counted to make it appear he is moderate on the environment. Pure propaganda from that hypocrite Reichert.
Of course, propaganda is what the republican party is all about – ask the ex-generals the pentagon paid to promote their agenda or the insiders, like McClellan, who observed the lack of truth from the inside.
Stalin would be very proud of the Bush administration and their use of the media – better than Goebbles too.
Rick D. @6, don’t take Goldy’s word for the $500,000 figure, read what Robert Mak wrote about it two years ago:
Richard Pope @9 wrote:
Like there’s no chance of that happening!
Leave Dave alone. He is a fine Christian man and is doing God’s work.
Therefore, the franking is no big deal.
s/
Jim, still never having attempted to operate a bagpipe assembly
Personally, I love to receive Republican junk mail, because they usually come with a postage-paid return envelope, in hopes that I will send a “generous contribution” to whomever’s campaign happens to be asking. In fact, I will usually make a $5 donation once a year to my least favorite GOP candidate just to stay on the mailing list and be able to receive even more junk mail with postage-paid return envelopes.
I don’t use the return envelopes for making a monetary contribution, but it is satisfying to stuff them full of expired pizza coupons and send them back to the candidate, knowing that they will have to pay for the postage and administrative cost for opening, inspecting and tossing the garbage. :-D
@ 15 – Yeah, that non partisan Robert Mak….wait, didn’t he just get a new job recently??
RHP6033 @ 8 – I too have some insight into the production of these and can tell you it does not approach the figure that Goldy fabricated from whole cloth. He’s thrown thrown out the dollar+ per piece without any facts to speak from. The figure is likely to be roughly a third of that if not less, but is way too much in my eyes anyway. I just hate when liberals throw this crap out there knowing full well you’re the party of Pork. How about both parties get rid of this practice alltogether? This piece is merely a partisan attack on Reichert and nothing else by Goldstein who’s a Burner shill.
@11
Nice try pooper.
@14…CnR…
Context, baby, context!
Goldy is criticizing the practice of disguising campaign literature as constituent education and information, and all I want to do is remind him how his favorite Golden Calf, Sound Transit, wrote the book on the subject.
Let’s not be selective in our righteous indignation, shall we???
Franked mail is an incumbent’s perquisite. It’s legal, so the only complaint that can be made about it is that it’s wasteful.
Fine…let’s call it that. Let’s call earmarks wasteful too, shall we?
Goldy and the rest of the HA Happy Hooligans are so obsessed with electing The Darcy that if God himself were to annoint Dave Reichert as His personal choice in the 8th CD, there would be a hue and cry over the improper melding of church and state.
Dave Reichert can do nothing right…The Darcy can do…uhm…what has she done? Oh, yeah…
The Darcy can do nothing because she has done nothing…and turning David Sirota on doesn’t count.
As an aside…how stupid was it that she contended for Russ Feingold’s booty for being the “most progressive” or other silly some such? Just what centrist moderates in the eth want to hear: The Darcy is in the running for the title of the most liberal Congressional candidate on this year’s ballot.
Maybe I should start calling her Comrade The Darcy?
What? Wasn’t Cynthia McKinney available? Oh…that’s right…she was booted in a primary down in Georgia.
Believe this or not…I know some 8th CD Democrats who won’t vote for her she’s so out of step with the district. Stuff like running in the Russ Feingold Dialing for Dollars Beauty Pageant reinforces those sentiments.
The Piper
Daniel K @ 16
I e-mailed the campaign contact e-mail for Brian Baird on this one. Not sure what happened of course, but the SOS website now says that Brian Baird “Prefers Democratic Party”.
There are several legislative candidates (including incumbents and challengers) who are listed as “Prefers Democrat Party”.
The rules that the SOS published say that someone should refile and repay the filing fee in order to correct the party preference. However, I somehow doubt that Reed will require this expensive correction to deal with mere spelling or grammatical issues.
@19 “I just hate when liberals throw this crap out there knowing full well you’re the party of Pork.”
But it’s just fine for you to throw unsupported crap out there. How Republican of you. As for the party of pork, well, it is now common knowledge that yours is the party of bridges to nowhere. Your own house needs to be put in order. Don’t you think that your time would be better spent expressing 24/7 non-stop outrage over Republican abuse of power?
@21 “Dave Reichert can do nothing right…”
No exception taken to this comment. You and broken clocks – even the Piper gets one right now and then.
“Let’s not be selective in our righteous indignation, shall we???”
Indeed, being selective in one’s righteous indignation is reserved for Republican use only.
What an ass you are.
Maybe Goldy can get his nose out of Darcy Burner’s crack long enough to explain how he arrived at the half million dollar figure and posted it as fact on his blog. He threw it out there because he knew the HA bobleheads here wouldn’t challenge him on it. I mean a non-partisan like Goldy wouldn’t dare inflate numbers on a congressman he hates to make the that congressman look bad now would he? No, Of course not.
@25 I’m sorry to say, but your guy looks bad enough without Goldie’s help. And your whining here doesn’t help his cause, although it certainly does have entertainment value.
@ 26 . If the author can’t back up his numbers, it’s a reflection on his sorry ass reporting skills. This website has zero credibility and it’s story’s like this that make that fact perfectly obvious. I guess he pulled the number out the HorsesAss afterall.
Keep bobbling on bobbleheads…….Goldy is your puppet master.
Cheers!
@27 About your whining, it really is distasteful. Try sucking it up and being a man for a change.
Rick D @27, we’ve provided you with where the numbers come from. Robert Mak’s reporting on this has been questioned by no-one but yourself. That he was hired by Nickels recently does not change reporting from him from 2 years ago.
This website has zero credibility and it’s story’s like this that make that fact perfectly obvious.
But for some reason you keep coming here after you said you’d leave.
Leave already! And don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out!
“We think Reichert spent more than Inslee, so threfore he did.”
Yawn.
Even if Reichert did spend more, why the pass for Inslee? Oh right, he’s a Democrat. Which is also why there’s no blame of Congress itself in here, because, well, we know who controls Congress.
And let’s not forget that if this is, as Goldy says, a “half-million dollar campaign contribution from US taxpayers,” then what do we call Gregoire’s expensive “listening tour” last year?
This is like a donkey calling Goldy an ass.
Darcy Burner: Harvard Grad., Microsoft Project Manager, sponsor of the Responsible Plan, and Congressional Candidate.
I’m voting for her — and so should you, Piper.
You already stated that you feel like her comrade!
Daniel,
“Robert Mak’s reporting on this has been questioned by no-one but yourself. That he was hired by Nickels recently does not change reporting from him from 2 years ago.”
As Karl Rove might put it: you have your temporal ordering…our WingDing friend Rick D has THE temporal ordering. Clearly, he must believe a Timelord influenced Mak’s earlier report.
@31 Your music is quite entertaining. Well done. Glad to see that the massive Koo-Aid consumption hasn’t damaged your vocal chords or motor skills.
Pudge,
“Even if Reichert did spend more, why the pass for Inslee?”
I live in Inslee’s district and collect Reichert mailings from a relative in the 8th. The stuff I get from inslee in the mail is generally in an envelope on ordinary (non-glossy) letterhead.
The difference is that Inslee is genuinely providing information to constitutients. Sheriff Hairspray is engaging in a perpetual campaign, complete with campaign-like glossy mailings.
I mean, what the fuck can “an aggressive Franked Mail program” mean other than “a perpetual campaign”???
Darryl, yes, of course Inslee is not campaigning. This is true because you say it is.
Steve: thanks, but what Kool-Aid are you referring to?
Hell, I just a few minutes posted in the “birthright citizenship” discussion my disagreement with that part of the state GOP platform. I voice disagreements with fellow Republicans all the time.
Oh right, I am a Republican, so by definition, I don’t think for myself. Yawn.
@37 Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Rick D,
Man…you’re pretty fucking stoopid…even by Wingnut troll standards. Let’s analyze, shall we?
“Maybe Goldy can get his nose out of Darcy Burner’s crack long enough to explain how he arrived at the half million dollar figure and posted it as fact on his blog.”
Problem: reading comprehension. The careful reader will notice that Goldy said:
Goldy provided an estimate of the upper limit to the costs of 475,000 pieces of franked mail, not an estimate of the actual cost.
“He threw it out there because he knew the HA bobleheads here wouldn’t challenge him on it.”
Problem: illogical inference. While it is possible that someone might challenge Goldy’s upper limit (“Hey Goldy, my Aunt owns a print shop, and $1/glossy 11×17 is an underestimate”), such a challenge would strengthen Goldy’s argument, not weaken it. Therefore, your statement is incorrect.
“I mean a non-partisan like Goldy wouldn’t…”
Problem: factual error. Goldy has repeated often that he is a partisan blogger. That you suggest Goldy thinks otherwise is just plain ignorance on your part.
“…dare inflate numbers on a congressman he hates to make the that congressman look bad now would he?”
Problem: Unsupported argument. You’ve provided no evidence whatsoever that Goldy’s upper limit of 0.5M dollars for nearly 0.5M mailings is in any way “inflated.” I mean, do you really believe that it is outrageous for 0.5M mailings might have an upper cost limit of 0.5M dollars?
Yes, exactly. When you have a chance to back it up, you can’t do it.
@40 Huh?
Pudge,
“Darryl, yes, of course Inslee is not campaigning.”
Nope…I pointed out the difference in style between Inslee’s mailings and Reichert’s mailings. One looks like a letter. The other is almost indistinguishable from a campaign mailing.
It doesn’t take a genius to see the difference. (Uhhh…Unless you have Wingding Impairment Syndrome, of course.)
@42…Darryl…
No matter the looks of a piece of mail, stupid is as stupid does.
And Inslee’s sponsorship of the bill that pays for HD convertor box coupons is almost as stupid as the City of Seattle’s proposition to put a cafe at one of its transfer stations.
Nothing like being able to watch Oprah in High Def…all on the government dole.
The Piper
@43 “Nothing like being able to watch Oprah in High Def…all on the government dole.”
And there’s nothing like invading the wrong country and then blowing the fucking war. Get your priorities straight, you fool.
Oh, and try stopping by Kinko’s and pricing the difference in printing the different mailers being discussed.
Darryl: what something looks like is irrelevant. Its purpose is what matters.
@45 And what’s the purpose? Re-electing or informing? You’d be on your high-horse if the shoe was on the other foot. But you’re a hypocrite so you don’t care.
Daryyl-ect @ 39 –
How does Goldy arrive at an “upper limit” when he has no idea of how many cents per color impression it costs to produce. Mass mailings like the one Reichert sent out are not going to run the same price per copy as Goldy running to Kinko’s to get a single color copy of his latest conquest with an Enumclaw barn denizen so his $500,000 estimate is just that- uninformed speculation.
Goldstein will take any chance to drag Reichert through the mud even if it means lying on his blog to do it and his devoted bobbleheads here at HA will just nod, agree and swallow whatever horseshit that Goldy shoves down your gullet.
@47 “Enumclaw barn denizen”
That’s some statement, coming from a goatfucking fascist such as yourself.
@ 48 ~ you’ve got something on your chin there Steve.
Steve: um, I didn’t see the mailings, how would I know? Again, the point is that you and Goldy and others are just saying the purpose of Reichert is one thing, while the purpose of Inslee is another, and you’ve given no reason to think that except for how it “looks.” Completely illogical.
And no, I am no hypocrite, unlike you. I call a spade a spade, no matter what side of the ideological fence it’s on.
Piper,
“No matter the looks of a piece of mail, stupid is as stupid does.”
Come-on, Piper, you are not that much of a simpleton. There IS a difference between sending a letter and sending a tri-fold Glossy picture-laden piece of campaign propoganda.
“And Inslee’s sponsorship of the bill that pays for HD convertor box coupons is almost as stupid as the City of Seattle’s proposition to put a cafe at one of its transfer stations.”
Piper…try to get more fiber in your diet. You’re sounding excessively whinny these days.
Still? I left Bellevue a few months ago, but wrote to him every single time I got one of those expensive mailers. Channel 5 news even did a big story on his practice of doing this near the end of his first term.
He sends them out to toot his own horn and “inform” the voters of how great he is at doing his job. It’s time again.
I hear the woman who opposed him last election is going to take another shot. She should, she came very close last time.
Pudge
“Darryl: what something looks like is irrelevant. Its purpose is what matters.”
Ahhh…no. I realize it is VERY difficult for you to keep up with the concepts here, but the issue at hand is whether franking privileged is being abused as a latent campaign tool, or whether the franking privilege is being used in the spirit for which it was intended for informing constituents of salient issues in Congress.
Production has EVERYTHING to do with differentiating between the two.
Rick D.
“How does Goldy arrive at an “upper limit” when he has no idea of how many cents per color impression it costs to produce.”
Well…you start at the budget of the U.S. Government and then narrow it down from there. And what the fuck are you babbling about…Of course Goldy has an idea of how many cents per color impression it costs to produce.
“Mass mailings like the one Reichert sent out are not going to run the same price per copy as Goldy running to Kinko’s to get a single color copy of his latest conquest with an Enumclaw barn denizen so his $500,000 estimate is just that- uninformed speculation. “
Ummm…no. You claim is completely retarded! OF COURSE Goldy can use information on a per-piece cost and estimate a discount for volume. Maybe you are unable to do that, but you are, obviously, fucking retarded!
Consider this: if Goldy knows the per-piece cost in low volume, then that is an excellent way to set the upper limit, even without discounting for volume, because it would be unlikely to be MORE expensive then that. Therefore his statement would be true.
“Goldstein will take any chance to drag Reichert through the mud”
So? I mean…if you don’t like it, what the fuck are you doing READING his blog?
“even if it means lying on his blog to do it”
Well…except that you cannot point out a situation where Goldy has lied. I mean…he has certainly pissed you off—but that doesn’t amount to lying.
“and his devoted bobbleheads here at HA will just nod, agree and swallow whatever horseshit that Goldy shoves down your gullet.”
Clearly you don’t spend enough time in the comment threads…people argue with Goldy all the time.
Sheesh, Rickster, it seem to me your ability to think rationally is being suppressed by your anger.
Pudge,
“um, I didn’t see the mailings, how would I know?”
You wouldn’t… because you are just making shit up. (*Strike one*) But I HAVE seen the mailings.
‘Again, the point is that you and Goldy and others are just saying the purpose of Reichert is one thing, while the purpose of Inslee is another, and you’ve given no reason to think that except for how it “looks.”‘
Incorrect. Goldy has not said squat about Inslee’s proper or improper use of franking, aside from reporting differences on the cost. Essentially, you have pulled some shit out of your ass and attributed it to Goldy. (*Strike two*)
“And no, I am no hypocrite, unlike you. I call a spade a spade, no matter what side of the ideological fence it’s on.”
Incorrect…you are simply making shit up! You haven’t seen the mailings from either Rep. You have put words in Goldy’s mouth. While that may not count as hypocrisy sensu stricto it sure seems like you call a spade whatever the hell you feel like calling it.
(*Strike Three*)
You’re outta here, Wingnut!
Darryl: you really suck at this. Really. Take some lessons or something.
See, I wrote: “…what something looks like is irrelevant. Its purpose is what matters.”
Then YOU replied, “Ahhh…no. … the issue at hand is whether franking privileged is being abused as a latent campaign tool, or whether the franking privilege is being used in the spirit for which it was intended for informing constituents of salient issues in Congress.”
See, Darryl, I said “the purpose is what matters,” and then you said “no, the purpose it is used for is what matters.” You disagreed with me and then simply restated what I said.
This is what I mean when I say you really suck at this.
But then for good measure, you add this: “Production has EVERYTHING to do with differentiating between the two.”
If that were true, then content has nothing to do with it, which is obviously false. So: no.
Then you just go completely off your nut here: “You wouldn’t (have seen the mailings) because you are just making shit up. … But I HAVE seen the mailings.”
First, obviously, I never made anything up (if I did, please point out what; I won’t hold my breath). Second, and more importantly, yes, this IS MY POINT. You and Goldy ask us to just take your word for it. You’ve seen them, you say one is campaign literature and the other is not, so that’s the truth!
But that is not how reality works. In the real world, where most of us live, you have to actually back up what you say.
“Goldy has not said squat about Inslee’s proper or improper use of franking, aside from reporting differences on the cost. Essentially, you have pulled some shit out of your ass and attributed it to Goldy.”
Actually, no, that was you. I asked why Goldy was giving a pass to Inslee. You responded because Inslee’s purpose was different. Oops on you.
“While that may not count as hypocrisy sensu stricto”
It is not hypocrisy in any sense, strict or otherwise.
“it sure seems like you call a spade whatever the hell you feel like calling it.”
Yes, it may seem like that to YOU, but as shown above … you really really suck at this. You said I was wrong and then agreed with me. You incorrectly said that content has nothing to do with whether a mailing is for campaigning or not. You keep making my point for me, that you are making a case you refuse to back up with actual evidence rather than your subjective opionion (that Reichert’s and Inslee’s purposes are different). You accuse me of attributing to Goldy what you attributed to Goldy. And you don’t know what “hypocrisy” means.
Had enough?
Darryl ~ This is the rationality by which Goldy arrived at the figure $500,000:
So with 90,000 in postage established, he went on to pull as much as $410,000 of out his ass and ran with it. Any of this starting to settle into your brain housing group Darryl? Maybe Larry can explain it to you or perhaps your “other brother Darryl” may be able to go over the bonehead math with you.
I asked @ 47: “how would Goldy arrive at an “upper limit” when he has no idea how many cents per color copy impression it costs to produce?”
Your MENSA answer? “well…you start at the budget for the U.S. Government and narrow it down from there”.
WTF kind of retard logic is that Darryl? Next time you break down someone’s post at least attempt your rebuttal to be coherent. Defending Goldy’s fuzzy math isn’t easy is it?
Congratulations on your degree from the AOL
Institute for the Development of Ideologue On-line Trolls, but even you can’t make Goldy’s claim square with the facts.
Other brother Darryl up……….
Ahh yes HAs BIGGEST ASSHOLE Steve@23 appeared. Go to PorkBusters and see the biggest porker in the world Robert Byrd.
Senator Robert C. Byrd’s Pork Tally
Byrd by the Numbers:
48: Total years in the Senate (since 1958)
47: Years served on appropriations committees (since 1959)
$2.95 billion: total West Va. pork from 1991 to 2006
$1.935 billion: total West Va. pork from 2000 to 2006
$1.2 billion: total projects added in the Senate from fiscal 1995 to fiscal 2006. (Projects that can most likely be attributed to Sen. Byrd)
Rick D.
“WTF kind of retard logic is that Darryl? Next time you break down someone’s post at least attempt your rebuttal to be coherent.”
Ummm…here is the logic, Slick: Since Uncle Sam is footing the bill, the actual upper limit for Reichert’s franking expense is no greater than the total spending of the U.S. See that? In other words, Goldy’s statement would have been trivially true if he used that figure.
“Defending Goldy’s fuzzy math isn’t easy is it?”
Well…it isn’t very difficult, given the generality of Goldy’s statement. You see, Goldy’s statement was that Reichert spent some amount less than or equal to $0.5M on 0.5M mailings.
“Congratulations on your degree from the AOL
Institute for the Development of Ideologue On-line Trolls, but even you can’t make Goldy’s claim square with the facts.”
Really? So…you would suggest that Reichert spent greater than $0.5M on the mailings? What evidence do you have for that, or are you just polling shit out of your ass? (Or do you not even understand what Goldy was saying?)
Stupes – you’re HA’s biggest jerk-off. The circle jerk-offs you had with MWS were classic.
All those figures you cite for Byrd. Seen the budget lately? It’s three freaking trillion dollars alone for one year. Byrd’s a drop in the bucket.
You’re so freaking stupid.
Stupes – Imagine that. HA’s two biggest jerk-offs, you and MWS, circle jerking.
Sort of a “hall of mirrors” effect.
LMAO!!!
By the way, you’re back and I saw Hannah drop a comment recently. Coinkydink?
Rick D @ 47: You are correct that it is innacurate to get a Kinko’s price for one copy of the Reichart ad, and then multiply it per page. But mass mailings isn’t entirely subject to a quantity discount. You figure it out (roughly) as follows:
1. Layout & Design. Include the cost of any special photos/logos created for the flyer, and copywriting of the text. Considering the importance to the campaign, I figure two or three people would spend upwards of a week or two on this project, including multiple corrections, additions, revisions, and re-designs. Add their salary & benefits to the cost. This is a fixed cost, irregardless of quantity.
2. Print Layout. This is a fixed cost – the time & materials it takes for the printer to set the project up for mass printing. More colors means more “plates” (to use the old term), as the paper goes through the printer one time for each color.
3. Ink & Paper & Printer Time – this is a per-copy charge, which varies based upon the number of colors used.
4. Folding – this is a per-copy charge.
5. Mailing List – this might seem to be a gimme, but is it? If it being sent to registered voters, has the list been updated and confirmed? If it goes to “residents”, has it been cross-checked against valid addresses in the USPS database (most mailing services have software which do this each time, for a fee).
6. Preparation for mass mailing – sorting into trays by zip sub-code, taking it to a mailing service (or Congressional mailing office).
7. Returned mail. Some firms operating off mailing lists have a “Do not forward – return to sender with address correction” notice. The sender then has to pay for the returned mail as it comes in, but then they can use that information to keep their database current. But I doubt Reichart’s mailings would use this system.
Anyway, it’s not so much that you get a “quantity discount”, as it is that there are certain fixed costs and some variable costs based upon the quantity printed, and the total job cost therefore makes it seem that it costs less in higher quantities.
Some commercial/retain printing companies, like Kinkos, might set this up as one price for the first 500 copies, then a reduced price for additional copies thereafter. That’s just a shorthand way to deal with the problem. Of course, that doesn’t include the initial layout and design, or the mailing itself – few people go to Kinko only with an “idea”.
@ 62 RHP6033. All those what-if’s are just that. You are speculating worst case scenario to make the numbers inflate to the “Goldy Standard” which in this case, is a half mill. He doesn’t say how he arrived at $500,000, but being a Burner shill, it sounds fair enough for partisan politics, right?
Frankly (no pun intended), I’m done obsessing about it since it is perfectly legal for both Reichert and INSLEE to conduct such mailings(though I’d personally like to see the practice restricted more for the taxpayers benefit). The Franking mail has even been cut considerably since its high marks of the 1980’s so if anything, the practice is getting reigned in quite a bit and not the other way around.
Goldy can whine all he wants , but thems the facts.