By Sheeva Azma
An incumbent is the current holder of a political office, and the statistics show that once someone is elected to an office, they are more likely to be elected to another term. In other words, the incumbency advantage is real: Ballotpedia reports that in the 2024 general election in the US, 95% of incumbents were reelected.
Challenging incumbents in Congress is tough due to many reasons, including franking
I recently spoke to Dr. Kristin Hook, PhD, who challenged incumbent US House member Chip Roy in Texas’s 21st district. She quit her job to go door-to-door and talk to voters for the greater part of a year, and still only captured 36% of the vote. Check out our interview here if you are so inclined. In our chat, we talk about the barriers she faced in trying to unseat someone who has been in power since 2019.
There are several reasons that political momentum favors establishment insiders. Someone who has been serving in the House or Senate for a while has name recognition, has good knowledge of the inner workings of how everything works in the federal legislative branch, and they also have this privilege you may or may not know about to make it easy to get in touch with constituents: franking privilege.
Communication is key in any relationship, and the same goes with the relationship between elected officials and the people they serve. Franking has evolved since its beginnings in 1775, but it is still a main benefit the Congress has that political outsiders do not.
In a nutshell, franking privilege, or “franking” as it is often called, is a way for politicians to communicate for free with their constituents. While this is meant to make communication easier between elected officials and their constituents, there are many ways that lawmakers can use franking to stay in power.
While franking is intended for official communication, critics argue that it gives incumbents an unfair advantage in elections by allowing them to maintain contact with constituents at public expense. This has led to ongoing debates and reforms to balance the need for constituent communication with concerns about electoral fairness.
Keep reading to learn all about franking and how it works in this post.
Franking is a public affairs tool used by Congressional offices
As we previously blogged, public affairs refers to a field of work dedicated to leveraging and shaping public opinion. It is a privilege granted to Members of Congress to be able to send official mail without paying postage. The practice of franking dates back to 1775 when the Continental Congress first gave its members franking privileges to help keep constituents informed.
Franking is taxpayer-funded
Today, franking is paid for by taxpayers, as the Senate Select Committee on Ethics described in a 2020 one-pager you can read here. Members of Congress do not pay postage for franked mail; rather, the costs are covered by public funds. Private funds cannot be used to ensure that the privilege is used solely for official business and public service, as intended by Congress. It also helps maintain transparency and accountability in the use of taxpayer money for congressional communications.
Congress reimburses the US Postal service for franked mail through legislative branch appropriations each year. The cost to deliver franked mail is paid through the sending office’s taxpayer-funded franking allotment. While franking expenditures have gone down significantly, given franking reforms in recent decades, as well as the increasing use of social media communication (which does not involve paying for postage or delivery of a message), the House paid $16.9 million for franking in fiscal year 2014, and the Senate paid $1.5 million in fiscal year 2015, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
Every mass mailing sent under franking privilege must include these words: “Prepared, Published, and Mailed at Taxpayer Expense.”
What can Congress mail out via franking?
Franking continues today, retaining its core function of allowing elected officials to inform constituents about the work going on in Congress. As such, it fulfills the founding fathers’ ideal of helping keep government transparent, including by the distribution of government documents and information to the public. Franking can be used to gather public opinion, as well: members can send questionnaires to gather constituent views on issues. Lastly, the communication does not have to stay between elected Members of Congress and constituents; franking can also enable communication between legislators and other government entities.
What do critics of franking say about it?
Critics of franking argue that it can be misused for political advantage, particularly during election seasons. Both the House and Senate have issued guidance detailing what does and does not count as franking. For example, the Committee on House Administration details a limit on franking around election days.
To address these concerns, regulations have been implemented to restrict the content and timing of franked mail, especially near elections. The concept of franking continues to evolve with changing communication technologies. While traditional mailed correspondence remains important, the rise of social media and other digital platforms has influenced how public officials communicate with constituents, leading to ongoing discussions about modernizing franking regulations in the digital age.
What are some things Congress sends out via franking that can help them get reelected?
Members of Congress use franking in several ways that can potentially aid their reelection efforts:
- Constituent communication: They can send newsletters, updates on legislation, and responses to constituent inquiries, keeping voters informed about their activities. This can help them get reelected if they have a specific issue they really care about and want to be known for among their constituents. Members of Congress may have a newsletter, send updates on legislation, or send a letter back to people who contact their office. Senator James Lankford, who represents me in the Senate, has both a newsletter called The Lankford Letter as well as an annual report on government waste he publishes called “Federal Fumbles” which you can read here. I get those electronically, so they are not paid for directly by franking funds, but I have also received paper mail from my Senators and Representatives in response to issues about which I contacted them.
- Mass mailings: Representatives can send mass mailings (500 or more pieces of substantially similar mail) to constituents, though there are restrictions on timing, such as limitations on franking near election dates.
- Writing letters to other Members of Congress: Franked mail can be used to communicate with other Members of Congress on official activities. This can be used as a strategic communications tool to comment on actions to gain favor with one’s constituents. I have seen letters sent to other Members of Congress go viral on social media, so yes, I do think that this type of letter-writing is sometimes used as a campaign tool.
- Press releases: Lawmakers can distribute press releases about official activities, potentially increasing their visibility and helping them spread the word on what they are doing. I would argue that franking, and specifically the use of press releases in this way, enables the re-election of incumbents who may seek to introduce specific legislation (and tell voters about it) just to stay in favor with their constituents, even if the legislation ultimately has no chance of becoming a law or will end up buried in committee, never even coming up for a vote. To me, that is a form of political campaigning, paid for by taxpayers, but others may differ in opinion.
In what ways is franking regulated?
Regulations and restrictions on the use of franking to prevent abuse include:
- Content limitations: Franked mail must be for matters of public concern or public service. It cannot be used to solicit votes, send campaign materials, or mail personal greetings.
- Pre-election restrictions: Members are prohibited from sending mass mailings close to elections.
- Disclosure requirements: As I mentioned previously, each mass mailing must include the aforementioned notice: “Prepared, Published, and Mailed at Taxpayer Expense.” So, when you see that on a letter from your member of Congress, know that you paid for it!
- Oversight: The use of franking is regulated by federal law and House and Senate rules. To regulate franking, the House has a Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, while the Senate has the Senate Select Committee on Ethics. Neither chamber allows the use of franking for soliciting votes, sending campaign materials, or mailing personal greetings.
How has social media changed franking privilege in Congress?
Social media has modernized and expanded the traditional concept of franking privilege. In today’s digital world, people use “snail mail” less, and that includes Members of Congress, who now post more often on social media platforms, which are cheaper and faster to use, and allow two-way communication between elected representatives and constituents. Social media is also a way for Members to communicate with a wide national and global audience, which can boost their influence beyond their local sphere. Lastly, data analytics on social media allow elected lawmakers to see the ways their message is making an impact, which is not possible with traditional “snail mail” that is used in franking.
This has all created new regulatory challenges, as legacy franking rules were created before social media even existed. That is why there are ongoing discussions about modernizing congressional communication rules to better accommodate social media while maintaining the spirit of the franking privilege. For example, the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards (also known as the Franking Commission) renamed itself the House Communications Standards Commission. You can view the 2020 Communication Standards Manual on their website.
Learn more about franking
There’s a lot to say about franking! For more about franking, check out the below references:
- Committee on House Administration. (n.d.) “The History of the Frank.” https://cha.house.gov/the-history-of-the-frank
- Congressional Research Service (2016). “Franking Privilege: Historical Development and Options for Change.” https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL34274/20
- PopVox Foundation (n.d.). “Franking.” https://www.popvox.org/intern-primers/franking
- US Senate Select Committee on Ethics (n.d.). “Franking, Mass Mailing, and Letterhead.” https://www.ethics.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/franking
- Committee on House Administration. (n.d.). “Communications Guidelines.” https://democrats-cha.house.gov/communications-standard-commission/communications-guidelines
Become a public affairs pro with Fancy Comma
Learn more about political communications and public affairs using Fancy Comma’s free resources, or hire us to communicate science-informed policy. Get in touch to see how we can help you!
Fancy Comma, LLC 