At left is a mailing from Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who said she makes her pamphlets attractive so they'll be noticed.

Other articles by Daniel Scarpinato:

Political Notebook by Daniel Scarpinato : Political luck seems to run out for Randy Gays can marry, says Calif. court; AZ ire rises AIMS bill with grade boost is approved Ariz. Republicans firmly anti-Obama Same-sex-marriage ban advances GOP-delegate vote a tap dance around rivalry Political Notebook by Daniel Scarpinato : Poky lawmakers have to live on less Pinal inks contract with Union Pacific Giffords No. 1 in mailings using U.S. funds Political Notebook by Daniel Scarpinato : Oien quits MADD after its overture to Glassman

Health Care
Mountain View Retirement Village
LPN Dental
Dr. John Carson, DDS, PC
Dental Asst/Treatment Coordinator Health Care
Visiting Angels
Caregivers Driver/Transportation
Allied Building Products
Driver / Rooftop Loader Trades/Construction
Paragon Electric
Electricians Driver/Transportation
Pioneer Landscaping
Drivers/End-Dumps Education
Indian Oasis Baboquivari Unified School District
Teachers / Principals

Credit-card offers, coupons and catalogs from places where you've never shopped — when those things flood your mailbox, there's no question that it's junk mail.

But when the material is from your member of Congress, updating you on what the heck he or she has been up to back in Washington, D.C., the value of that mail seems to be in the eye of the beholder.

And lately those mass mailings — called congressional franking and done with your tax dollars — are the subject of debate.

Are the mailings a necessary way for members of Congress, such as Southern Arizona Reps. Raúl Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords, to stay in touch with constituents? Or do they simply amount to a taxpayer-funded way to promote oneself in anticipation of the next election?

In Southern Arizona, Grijalva didn't spend anything in the first three months of the year on mailings. Neighboring Democrat Giffords spent nearly $40,000 in the first quarter, which ended in March. Her office says she has spent a total of $80,000 so far this year on mailings. The money paid for two newsletters sent to 137,000 households and a postcard sent to 25,000 households.

Spending like that prompted U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake, a Phoenix-area Republican, to try to change the franking process. Flake — who spends nothing on mailings — wants such material to include a list of how much it cost the taxpayer.

Why? According to the National Taxpayers Union, members of Congress spent more than $22 million on franked mail in 2005. And despite rules that prohibit the politicians from mailing close to election time, spending in 2004 was just $1.5 million less.

"They're campaign mail in disguise," Flake said. "When you have both parties encouraging their freshmen to be careful hiring staff so they can have $100,000 or $200,000 in the bank for mass mail, that is blatant campaign mail."

But Giffords and Phoenix Democrat Ed Pastor, who both have used the franking power, say the mailings are meant to inform constituents — not help their re-election efforts.

Pastor spent more than Giffords did in the first quarter, reporting more than $41,000 for mailers. Like Grijalva and Flake, Reps. John Shadegg, a Republican, and Harry Mitchell, a Democrat, didn't send mass mailings in the first quarter.

Tracking down how much members of Congress have spent can be difficult, because it takes months for the reports to become available.

Arizona Republican Reps. Trent Franks and Rick Renzi did not respond to the Star's inquiry. While the information eventually can be obtained through federal depository libraries, those contacted in Arizona have not yet received the first-quarter reports.

Giffords, who was the sixth-highest-spending House freshman on Roll Call newspaper's analysis of franking, called herself "very frugal" when it comes to mailings. The list covered 52 Democratic and Republican freshmen.

"I think it's my job to keep my constituents fully informed," she said.

Giffords also said it's important to make the mailed materials attractive so they don't get lost amid the mass of junk mail that constituents receive.

"I think it's just like anything else," she said. "You have to make it appealing when it lands with all your other mail."

On one mailer, a four-page color piece, Giffords is pictured four times. The newsletter featured the dates of Giffords' local meetings and appearances, details of a visit to Iraq, and information on how she voted on several pieces of legislation.

The other mailer contained an "immigration survey" and an article titled "Giffords fights for overhaul of immigration laws," detailing speeches she has made on the House floor and her positions on proposed changes.

All mailers are required to meet certain guidelines monitored by a franking committee, which checks how many times a member's name is mentioned and whether the mail is political — or informative.

Grijalva said he typically doesn't take advantage of the practice. "We do a lot of individual mail, constituent response," he said. "Sometimes it seems redundant to keep doing mass mailings."

He said that sometimes a mailer will go out to a certain segment of his district that might be affected by new legislation, such as veterans, for example.

"I like to connect it to a service we do, rather than a promotional piece," Grijalva said.

Pastor said, "This is probably the only source of information my constituents receive where they can learn … about my work in Washington on Arizona's behalf."

Even though Republican Frank Antenori, who ran for the 8th District seat in last year's primary election, is critical of the franking practice, he acknowledges that he'd be sending out mailers if he were in Giffords' place. In fact, he took time to fill out Giffords' immigration survey and mail it in.

"She knows if she faces a tough re-election, she needs to save as much money as she can for her general election challenge," Antenori said.

But Oro Valley Democrat Robert Cozad, a former Capitol Hill staffer, said the mailers aren't campaign literature. He said Giffords and others are rightly opening a dialogue with voters.

"One of the big problems we have with the current administration is that they're taking away all of transparency in government and trying to do everything behind the curtains," Cozad said. "There has to be a methodology of reaching and keeping the voters apprised."

As for Flake's bill, he's not very optimistic that Congress will choose to regulate itself any more than it does now.

"It's been introduced — and nothing," he said of the bill. Meanwhile, he said, "people are campaigning on the public dime."