text: It’s difficult for many of us to imagine a world without the benefits of technology. As mobile providers revolutionize our daily lives with each new gadget and companies tout the simplicity of e-commerce and social networking, it’s all too easy to forget that this technology is simply not accessible for millions of Americans, especially seniors. 
   
   The transformative power of technology is real, but so is the digital divide. 
   
   Across the country, more than 25 percent of Americans lack Internet access, and seniors are especially likely to be without technology. More than 50 percent of Americans over age 65 lack Internet access, while nearly half of them do not even own a computer. 
   
   Seniors make up the lion’s share of the more than 30 million households — a quarter of our population — that are being left behind while the rest of America goes online. While great strides are being made to deliver technology to more Americans, we are not there yet. 
   
   Yet despite this deep digital divide, government agencies are increasingly choosing to eliminate traditional access to paper-based services and information — leaving millions of Americans, especially seniors, behind. 
   
   Federal agencies, from the Treasury to the Social Security Administration, are now forcing Americans — even those who lack Internet and even computer access — to go online to interact with their government. And many of these decisions to go paperless primarily affect seniors, who are nearly twice as likely to be without Internet access. 
   
   The Treasury, for example, ambitiously set a March 2013 deadline to completely phase out paper federal benefits checks. For two years leading up to the deadline, the agency demanded that Social Security beneficiaries either switch to direct deposit or opt into electronic debit cards, which carry steep fees. The March deadline came and went, however, with 5 million beneficiaries — mostly elderly Americans — refusing to give up paper checks. 
   
   Many of these seniors and other federal beneficiaries are uncomfortable with electronic debit cards or the direct-deposit process, or simply do not have a bank account. Others have concerns about privacy and growing cybersecurity threats. They are not ready or equipped for digital banking or online interaction, and our government should not force them. 
   
   Benefits checks aren’t the only paper-based services being eradicated. The Social Security Administration has also eliminated the mailing of annual earnings statements, which offered all workers ages 25-60 a chance to double-check the government’s math and plan for retirement. Now these statements are only accessible online, meaning that low-income earners who most need these earnings statements are unlikely to ever get a copy. 
   
   The Treasury also phased out paper savings bonds, turning an important American tradition into just another click of the mouse. The move also makes it difficult for seniors, who were once the primary buyers of savings bonds, to purchase them. 
   
   Although the government’s rush to go paperless clearly penalizes seniors and other Americans without access to technology, the general public also disagrees with these actions. 
   
   According to a new national poll by the advocacy group Consumers for Paper Options, 73 percent of American adults believe it is wrong to expect Americans to interact with government agencies online. 
   
   Additionally, 85 percent said federal decisions to restrict paper-based services should be overseen by Congress. Right now, these decisions are made behind closed doors — often without congressional oversight or public comment. 
   
   These survey respondents — all of whom have Internet access — also recognized the negative consequences for seniors and others caught in the digital divide. Nearly 90 percent of respondents said the government’s shift to paperless services disadvantages elderly, disabled, low-income and poorly educated Americans. 
   
   The government’s rush to go paperless is disenfranchising millions of seniors and other vulnerable Americans and making the digital divide even deeper. 
   
   The push to make these changes while millions of seniors remain uncomfortable with technology — and even more cannot even access it — should stop. Government agencies shouldn’t be rushing to make these changes, and Congress should have proper oversight of such significant shifts in policy that negatively affect our seniors and all Americans. 
   
   We call on our fellow members of Congress to help us ensure that federal agencies embrace the benefits of a digital world without discriminating against Americans who lack access to technology or the skills to use them. 
   
   Our job is to serve the American people. That means maintaining and protecting access for all. 
   
   Rep. Sean P. Duffy is a Republican from Wisconsin; Rep. Michael H. Michaud is a Democrat from Maine. ||||| Language tucked into last month’s budget deal requires the government to plan for resuming paper delivery of annual Social Security earnings statements to some of the nation’s 150 million future retirees. (Matt Rourke/AP) 
   
   As the Obama administration pushes to do more business over the Internet, finally seeking to close the technology gap with the private sector, the digital makeover is running into a dogged opponent called Consumers for Paper Options. 
   
   The group is working the halls of Congress in closed-door meetings, underwriting research favorable to its position and mounting a news media campaign in an effort to preserve Washington as the capital of paper — and slow the move away from printed checks, forms and other paper communication. 
   
   The lobbying group has had some recent victories, including language tucked into last month’s budget deal that requires the government to plan for resuming paper delivery of annual Social Security earnings statements to some of the nation’s 150 million future retirees. And it’s been claiming these wins in the name of the elderly and low-income Americans the Internet has left behind. 
   
   Except Consumers for Paper Options is a creation of the paper industry. 
   
   The group — which bills itself as “a coalition of individuals and organizations advocating for access to paper-based services and information” — was set up by the Envelope Manufacturers Association (EMA), officials from both organizations said. It receives financial backing from the paper industry’s largest trade group, several of North America’s biggest paper manufacturers and EMA, according to documents and interviews with company and trade association officials. The EMA and other paper companies are also pushing for Congress to pass legislation to help stabilize the Postal Service. 
   
   Consumers for Paper Options is led by a veteran advocate for the industry’s interests on Capitol Hill. His previous posts include head of federal government relations for International Paper, the largest pulp and paper company in the world, and treasurer of its PAC. 
   
   “The glitzy new thing is to be pro-technology,” said John Runyan, Consumers for Paper Options’ executive director. “But a lot of government agencies are saying, �?We’re going electronic and the heck with it.’ ” 
   
   With federal budgets under fire in Congress, the government’s move to the Internet has gained pace. An electronic payment, for instance, costs the government only 9 cents to process, compared with $1.25 for a paper check, the Treasury Department says. 
   
   At Treasury, which last year suspended most paper mailings for all but the very aged and those with “mental impairments,” officials estimate the shift will save $1 billion over 10 years. The move by the Social Security Administration in 2011 to stop mailing paper earnings statements to 150 million Americans is saving $72 million a year. 
   
   For the paper industry, the stakes are high. The digital age has ravaged sales of envelopes, office paper, catalogues and pulp products, with industry analysts saying that demand for paper products dropped 5 percent on average in each of the past five years. Mills have closed, and thousands of employees have been laid off. 
   
   So Consumers for Paper Options and industry officials have raised the banner of the digital divide, warning that putting government services online is creating hurdles for many Americans. 
   
   Runyan said his group is not against technology but rather is for choice: “If there are Americans who can’t use an iPhone to navigate the Internet, there ought to be an option for them.” 
   
   When asked whether Consumers for Paper Options represents consumers or the industry, Runyan said the point is that a quarter of Americans do not have Internet access. He added that its efforts have won support from ordinary Americans. 
   
   Maynard Benjamin, president of the EMA, said the “consumers” in the group’s name are “everybody’s mother and father and sister who care about the way government policy develops.” 
   
   While some traditional consumer groups have also asked the government to make accommodations for the elderly and others who do not use the Internet, it is Runyan’s organization that has been most active on the issue. 
   
   The group’s lobbyists have been meeting with members of Congress and their staffs, concentrating in particular on those from paper-producing states and districts with large elderly populations. Runyan and Benjamin said the goal is to “educate” lawmakers about what advocates describe as the government’s willy-nilly rush to digitize without proper oversight. 
   
   Runyan met with Rep. Susan A. Davis (D-Calif.) and pressed her to get language put into the budget bill requiring the Social Security Administration to develop a plan to restore the mailing of paper earnings statements, said Runyan and the lawmaker’s staff. 
   
   Late last year, Consumers for Paper Options scored another victory when Rep. Michael H. Michaud (D-Maine), working with the American Forest and Paper Association, used his influence to have language removed from a pharmaceutical bill that would have ended the practice of printing prescription information and inserting it into drug packages, instead requiring that it be posted online. The Food and Drug Administration has been pressing for the change, which the agency says would save money and ensure the information is up to date. 
   
   But Michaud warned that the change would put consumers at risk. 
   
   His argument about the dangers of the “rush to go paperless” was highlighted in a December op-ed article in Roll Call signed by Michaud and Rep. Sean P. Duffy (R-Wis.), which said the shift was “disenfranchising millions of seniors and other vulnerable Americans and making the digital divide even deeper.” Consumers for Paper Options helped craft the piece and got it placed in Roll Call, according to officials familiar with the article. 
   
   The group has conducted several studies of consumer preferences, Runyan said, including a poll last year that reportedly found that 73 percent of American adults do not think they should be required to interact with the government online. Those research findings have been repeatedly cited in newspapers and trade publications across the country and attributed to Consumers for Paper Options. In very few instances did they disclose that the group was set up by the paper industry. 
   
   Consumers for Paper Options started in 2010 as the Senate was debating the Dodd-Frank Act, which created new regulations for the financial industry. A little-noticed proposal would have required banks and credit-card companies to put all statements online. That provision was never enacted. 
   
   But the Obama administration had other plans to reduce paper services. The government, for instance, was looking to make use of direct deposit or prepaid debit cards for monthly checks for veterans, federal retirees, disabled Americans and 66 million retirees on Social Security. IRS tax forms and other government “paperwork” were also going online. 
   
   The paper industry was growing alarmed. Consumers for Paper Options stepped up its fundraising and outreach in Washington, arguing, for instance, that using debit cards would saddle the poor with high fees and that electronic tax refunds and checks would lead to stolen identities. 
   
   “I wish we had launched this effort 10 years ago,” said Thomas Howard, vice president of government relations for Domtar, one of North America’s largest paper manufacturers and a financial backer of Consumers for Paper Options. “But we’re on top of things now. Government agencies are in effect slamming citizens by determining how they will receive vital information.” 
   
   In the past year alone, 22 of the largest federal agencies have reduced their spending on paper by about 7 percent, to $64 million a year, according to data from the General Services Administration. With the trend likely to continue, Duffy and Michaud have introduced a resolution calling for government action to ensure that people be provided with “paper-based information” along with electronic. The measure is awaiting a hearing. 
   
   While government purchases of paper are a small share of overall demand, Runyan said that restoring the use of paper in federal transactions could set a precedent for the private sector, where the economic threat of financial firms and retailers going all-digital is far greater. 
   
   He says his group has enlisted many partners in the fight, including Consumer Action and the Gray Panthers, an advocacy group that focuses in part on issues affecting senior citizens. The organizations are not official members but like-minded groups in an “advocacy effort that’s trying to leverage resources. . . . We’re not just advocating on behalf of the industry,” Runyan said. 
   
   Officials from several traditional consumer groups said they had held discussions with Consumers for Paper Options about their shared concerns and ways that it could help them, for instance by conducting research. 
   
   Sally Greenberg, executive director of the National Consumers League, said she’s a “big believer in getting a piece of paper sent to you at least once a year” and isn’t opposed to teaming up with others on the same side of the issue. But along with other advocates who held discussions with Consumers for Paper Options, she still wasn’t sure whom that group represents. 
   
   “I don’t know who’s behind them,” she said. 
   
   Alice Crites contributed to this report.
target: – In 2011, the Social Security Administration put the kibosh on mailing paper statements to 150 million future retirees, at an annual cost savings of $72 million. But last month's budget contained language that forces the government to plan for restarting these paper mailings. Ridiculous? Not according to a group called Consumers for Paper Options, which lobbied for that change and has since 2010 been "advocating for access to paper-based services and information," as the group puts it. But though the group says it's a "coalition of individuals and organizations," it's actually a product of the paper industry, the Washington Post reports: It was established by the Envelope Manufacturers Association and gets funding from the top paper-industry trade group. The Treasury expects to save $1 billion over a decade following its 2013 move to largely paperless communications, noting that processing a paper check costs $1.25, which is $1.16 cents more than the cost of an electronic payment. (It hasn't stopped paper mailings to the elderly and people with "mental impairments," the Post notes.) But "if there are Americans who can't use an iPhone to navigate the Internet, there ought to be an option for them," says a rep for Consumers for Paper Options, noting that a quarter of the US lacks Internet access. He also cites a study that says 73% of adults don't believe they should have to deal with the government online. That study was run by the group. A recent op-ed in Roll Call signed by a pair of congressmen also pushed for paper; it turns out Consumers for Paper Options was involved in that piece, too. Who are the "consumers"? "Everybody’s mother and father and sister who care about the way government policy develops," says an industry leader.