,---------- --_._-{p7

I

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

11 INDEX

10 CLEARINGHOUSE: Election Case Law 89

800 LINE8 Last-Minute Contributions: 48-Hour

Reporting9 Last-Minute Independent Expenditures:

24-Hour Reporting

COMPLIANCE8 New Procedures for Investigations8 MURS Released to the Public

6 STATISTICS: House and Senate Activity

axmT CASES4 FEC v. Working Names, Inc.4 FEC v. Friends of Isaiah Fletcher

COIm\ittee4 New Litigation

6 PUBLI~TIONS: 1990 Disclosure Directory

5 AUDITS: Report on Larouche Campaign

1 ADVISORY OPINIWS

(continued)

3 LmIS!ATIOO; Ethics Reform Act Amended

TABLE OF CDfi'I!Nl'S

AD 1990-4: Use of Credit Cards to ChargeCombined Dues/Contributionpayments

The American veterinary Medical Association(AVMA), an incorporated membership organiza­tion, may collect combined payments ofmembership dues and contributions to itsseparate segregated fund (AVMAPAC) throughcredit card charges. This method of col­lecting PAC contributions will not result inprohibited contributions since AVMA plans todeposit payments charged to professionalcorporation accounts into a separate fundused to defray AVMAPAC's administrativeexpenses.

999 E Street NW Washington DC 20463 Volume 16, Number 7ADVISORY OPINICN SllMHARIES

July 1990

AOR 1990-11Disposal of excess campaign assets (silverbelt buckles) by 1988 Presidential cam­paign. (Date Made Public: May 24, 1990;Length: 2 pages)

FEe STAFF TO VISIT B<H>LUWAs part of the Conunission's state

outreach program, FEC public affairsspecialists will be in HonoluluAugust 6-7 to answer questions on theFederal Election Campaign Act and FECregulations. They will meet withcandidates, campaign workers and thestaffs of PACs and party committees.Individuals involved in the September22 Hawaii special election and anyoneelse interested in the rules on fed­eral campaign finance may schedule ameeting with the FEC's visitingstaff. Call FEC specialists DorothyHutcheon or Patricia Klein at 800/424-9530 or 202/376-3120.

AOR 1990-9Publication of public affairs newsletter bycandidate as sole proprietor. (Date madepublic: May 15, 1990; Length: 9 pages,including attachment)

ADVISORY OPINIQ{ REQ:JESTSThe following chart lists recent

requests for advisory opinions (AORS). Thefull text of each AOR is available forpublic review and comment in the FEe'sPublic Records Office.

AOR 1990-10Disaffiliation between PACs of parentcorporation and its bankrupt subsidiary.(Date Made Public: May 23, 1990; Length:·21 pages, including attachment)

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COrviIVIISSIOI\J Volume 16, Number 7

under the proposed plan, AVMA will actas a collecting agent for AVMAPAC, deposit­ing the combined dues/contribution paymentsinto a holding account (considered an AVMA.corporate account) and then transmitting tothe PAC a check representing the total ofnoncorporate money contributed to AVMAPAC.This procedure is consistent with FEC col­lecting agent regulations, provided AVMAforwards to the PAC both the contributionsand the required contributor informationwithin certain time limits. Contributionsof $50 or less must be forwarded within 30days of AVMA's receipt, and contributionsexceeding $50 must be forwarded within 10days. 11 CFR 102.6(c)(4) and (5) and102.8(b) •

The Commission has previously permittedcontributions made by credit cards. AO1976-68; see also AOs 1989-26 and 1984-45.AO 1990-4, however, makes clear that thedate of receipt for a contribution made bycredit card is the date that AVMA. receivesthe member's authorization to charge duesand a contribution to his or her credit cardaccount. This date is considered the dateupon which AVMA obtains possession of thecontribution. (See 11 CFR 102.8(b)(2).) Inthis respect, AO 1990-4 supersedes AD 1978­68, which stated that the date of receiptwas the date when the recipient committee'Saccount received a credit or deposit of theproceeds.

Because individual members of AVMA. mayuse credit cards issued to their incorpo­rated practices, AVMA plans to deposit thiscorporate money into a "corporate" AVMAPACaccount used only for the PAC's administra­tive expenses. This is a permissible use ofcorporate payments, based on FEC rules andpast advisory opinions. Commission regula­tions permit an incorporated membership or­ganization to use "general treasury monies,including.••dues monies or membership fees,for the establishment, administration, andsolicitation of contributions to its sepa­rate segregated fund." 11 CFR 114.5(b).Furthermore, the Commission has previously

permitted members of an incorporated tradeassociation to provide funds or merchandiseto the association or to a separate adnUnis­trative account for the purpose of defrayingthe administrative and solicitation expensesof the association's separate segregatedfund. ADs 1986-13, 1982-36 and 1980-59.The Co~ssion has also permitted individualmembers of a membership organization to usetheir professional corporation accounts todefray administrative costs of the organ­ization's separate segregated fund. NJ1982-61. Accordingly, funds from a profes­sional corporation controlled by an individ­ual AVMA member may be deposited into anadministrative account used solely foradmdnistrative and solicitation expenses ofthe PAC.

AVMA may absorb all credit card feessince they are considered admdnistrative andsolicitation expenses. 11 CFR 102.6(c)(2)(i). (Date issued: May 4, 1990; Length:5 pages)

NJ 1990-6: Preemption of oregon Lawprohibiting Charitable MatchingPlan for PAC Contributions

Pacific power and Light (PP&L) may imple­ment a plan to match employees' contribu­tions to its federal separate segregatedfund (PAC) with charitable donations sincethe Federal Election campaign Act preemptsan Oregon law prohibiting such a plan•.

oregon law prohibits the application of"undue influenceu to induce a person tomake a political contribution and defines"undue influenceu to include "giving orpromising to give money, employment orother thing of value. u Oregon StateStatutes, section 260.665. As written, theprovision applies to federal-election con­tributions as well as nonfederal contribu­tions. According to the Oregon ElectionsDivision, PP&L's plan to match the fullvalue of employees' contributions to itsfederal PAC with a donation to a 501(c)(3)charity chosen by the contributor would

Federal Election CalIIli.ssion, 999 E street, NW, Washington, OC 20463800/424-9530 202/376-3120 202/376-3136 (TOO)

Lee Ann Elliott, ChairmanJOM Warren McGarry, Vice ChairmanJoan D. Aikens'Ihomas J. JosefiakDanny L. McDonaldScott E. 'Ihamas

Walter J. Stewart, secretary of the Senate,Ex Officio Commissioner

Dennald K. Anderson, Clerk of the House ofRepresentatives, Ex Officio Commissioner

2

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16,Number7

constitute a "thing of value" to an employ­ee and could induce an employee to contri­bute.

Past advisory opinions regardingcorporate matching plans have viewed acorporation's payment of matching chari­table donations as an exempt solicitationexpense, payable by a separate segregatedfund's connected organization under2 U.S.C. §441b(b)(2)(C). ADs 1989-9, 1989­7, 1988-48, 1987-18 and 1986-44. PP&L mayrely on those opinions to conduct its ownplan.

Concerning the preemption issue, thelegislative history of the Act makes clearthat federal law occUpies the field withrespect to the limdtations and prohibi­tions on contributions and expendituresused in federal elections. (H.R. Rep. Nos.93-1239 (p. 10) and 93-1438 (p. 69), 93dCong., 2d Sess. (1974).) See 2 U.S.C §453;11 CFR 108.7. The Act therefore preemptsthe Oregon statute or any state law, orinterpretation of state law, prohibitingthe use of a charitable matching plan toraise funds for use in federal electionsonly. See also AD 1982-29.

Commissioners McDonald and Thomas planto file concurring opinions. (Date issued:May 21, 1990; Length: 4 pages)

~ TO ETHICS REFORM ACrTechnical amen~ents to the Ethics

Reform Act of 1989 restore severalprovisions of the 1978 Ethics in GovernmentAct concerning the filing of candidates'personal financial disclosure reports.Signed into law by president Bush on May 4,1990 (Public Law 101-280), the amendments("Technical Corrections tt

) also revise theFederal Election Campaign Act provision onhonoraria, 2 V.s.C. §441i.

Personal Financial DisclosureUnder the new law, all House and Senate

candidates, including nonincumbents, willcontinue to file reports disclosing their

lThe changes brought about by the EthicsReform Act of 1989 were summarized in pastRecord issues: February 1990 (repeal ofgrandfather clause); April 1990 (personalfinancial disclosure and honoraria); andMay 1990 (correction to April 1990article) •

3

personal finances with the Clerk of theHouse or the Secretary of the Senate, andthe Congressional ethics committees willcontinue to review those reports. (The1989 provision, now repealed, would haverequired nonincumbent House and Senatecandidates to file personal financialreports with the FEC, which would have beenresponsible for reviewing them.) stilleffective is the longstanding requirementthat nonincumbent Presidential and vicePresidential candidates file their personalfinancial reports with the FEC.

The 1990 amendments do not affect otherprovisions of the 1989 Ethics Reform Actthat govern the filing of candidates'personal financial reports. Under oneprovision, which will become effective inJanuary 1991, the filing requirement forcandidates will apply only to those indi­viduals who have met the definition ofItcandi dat e lt under 2 U.S.C. §431(2).2 underanother provision, also effective January1991, a personal financial report will bedue within 30 days after the individualbecomes a Itcandidate" or on May 15 of theelection year, whichever is later, but inno event 3later than 30 days before theelection.

Honorarium 1\IEndmentThe 1990 technical amendments also

change 2 U.S.C. §441i, excluding from thedefinition of honorarium any amountsaccepted for the travel and subsistenceexpenses of a child accompanying thehonorarium recipient. The amendment became

(continued)

2under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978(in effect until January 1991), an individ­ual becomes a "candi.date" for purposes offiling a personal financial report when heor she (1) has taken action necessary understate law to qualify for election or (2)has filed a statement of Candidacy (FECForm 2 or letter containing the sameinformation) pursuant to 2 U.S.C. S432(e)(1) •

3Still effective until January 1991 is therequirement that candidates file a personalfinancial report within 30 days of becominga candidate. during the election year or byMay 15 of the election year, whichever islater, but in no event later than sevendays before the election.

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Number7

effective on May 4, 1990. Thus, the traveland subsistence exemption now applies tothe honorarium recipient and to a child orspouse or aide accompanying the recipient.

The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 pre­viously amended section 441i by limitingits application to the Senate--that is, tohonoraria accepted by Senators and officersand employees of the U.S. Senate. Thatamendment will become effective January 1,1991.

FEC v , WRKIR; NMES, INC. (87-2467-GAG)On May 10, 1990, the U.S. District

Court for the District of Columbia grantedthe FEC's petition to hold Working Names,Inc., and its president, Meyer T. Cohen, incontempt of court for failing to pay civilpenalties. In a May 1989 default judgment,the court had ordered defendants to pay a$2,000 civil penalty included in a concili­ation agreement (MUR 1542) and had imposedan additional $2,000 civil penalty pluscourt costs. (See the July 1988 Record fora summary of the default judgment.) How­ever, defendants paid only $100 toward thepenalties.

Under the terms of the court's May 1990order, defendants must pay $75 per day foreach day the assessments remain unpaid.The late charge will increase to $150 perday after June 17, 1990. Additionally,defendants must pay interest on the unpaidcivil penalties and court costs.

(A new suit filed against working Namesis summarized under New Litigation, below.)

FEC v. FRIENDS OF ISAIAH FLETCHER CCI'IUTTEEOn May 18, 1990, the U.S. District

Court for the District of Maryland orderedthe Friends of Isaiah Fletcher Committeeand its treasurer, Mr. Fletcher, to beginpaying a $5,000 civil penalty that hadremained outstanding since the court im­posed it on April 24, 1989. (Civil ActionNo. PN 88-2323.) In that ruling, the courtfound that the committee had violated2 U.S.C. §434(a)(2)(A) by failing to file a1986 quarterly report. The court ordereddefendants to pay a $5,000 penalty and theFEC's court costs. (See the June 1989Record for a summary of the judgment.)

On March 27, 1990, the FEC filed apetition asking the court to (1) holddefendants in contempt for their failure to

4

pay the assessments and (2) order defend­ants to pay the interest that had accruedon the penalty. The court denied themotion but ordered defendants to beginpaying the assessments in monthly install­ments of $300 each beginning June 15, 1990.The court also ordered Mr. Fletcher to filea statement profiling his financialsituation.

NDl LITI~TlOO

FEe v , working Names, Inc. (9O-1009-GAG)The Commission asks the district court

to declare that Working Names, Inc., andits president, Meyer T. Cohen, knowinglyand willfully violated 2 U.S.C. §438(a)(4)by making commercial use of informationcopied from reports maintained by theSenate Office of PUblic Records.

The FEC claims that Working Names com­piled a list of potential contributors fromdisclosure reports filed with the SenateOffice of Public Records. The list 1allegedly included two fictitious namestaken from a 1983 report filed by theSenator Lloyd Bentsen Election Committee.The FEC further claims that Working Namesmarketed the mailing list to brokers, who,in turn, rented the list to at least 17organizations. Because Mr. Cohen, asPresident of working Names, had previouslysigned a conciliation agreement in MUR 1472in which he admitted to past violations of§438(a)(4), the Commission contends thatWorking Names and Mr. Cohen were aware ofthe prohibitions against the salejuserestriction on information copied fromreports, and that the violation was there­fore knowing and willful.

The Commission asks the court to assessthe perialty for a knowing and willfulviolation (the greater of $10,000 or 200percent of the amount involved in theviolation; see 2 U.S.C. §437g(a)(6)(C»).The Commission also asks that the courtaward the FEC court costs and permanentlyenjoin defendants from further violationsof the salejuse prohibition.

U.S. District Court for the District ofColumbia, Civil Action No. 90-1009, April30, 1990.

1FEC rules permit a political committee touse up to ten fictitious names in a reportas a method of determining whether thenames and addresses of individualcontributors are being used illegally.11 CFR 103.4(e).

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTIOI\J COIVIMISSION Volume 16, Number 7

FEe v , Mann for Congress CODIIti.tteeThe Commission asks the district court

to declare that the Mann for CongressCommittee and its treasurer, Terry L. Mann,failed to comply with the terms of aconciliation agreement entered into onDecember 19, 1988. (The committee was theprincipal campaign committee of Mr. Mann, a1986 House candidate.) Under the terms ofthe 1988 agreement, the committee and Mr.Mann, as treasurer, agreed to refund$17,746 in excess contributions, disclosethe refunds on FEC reports and pay a $5,000civi! penalty. The Commission claims thatdefendants have not made any paymentstoward the civil penalty and have not filedany reports showing that they refunded theexcess amounts to the contributors. TheCommission therefore asks the court to:o Order defendants to comply with the

conciliation agreement and pay intereston the $5,000 penalty;

o Assess additional penalties againstdefendants;

a Per.manently enjoin them from futureviolations of the conciliation agreement;and

o Award the FEC court costs.U.S. District Court for the District of

Columbia, Civil Action No. 90-1154, May 16,1990.

AUDIT REPORT 00 LAIUJCHE CAMPAI~ RELFASEDon May 17, 1990, the Commission

approved the final audit report on theLaRouche Democratic Campaign, the publiclyfunded committee of Lyndon LaRouche, a 1988Presidential primary candidate. Based onthe results of the audit, the Commissionmade an iniHal determination that thecampaign repay a total of $154,894 inpublic funds to the U.S. Treasury. Therepayment total is based on the auditfindings summarized below.

If the campaign does not dispute theinitial determination within 30 days, thedetermination becomes final, and the cam­paign must make the repayment to the u.s.Treasury within 90 days of the initialdetermination.

Final audit reports are available forreview in the Public Records Office.

5

Matching Fwlds Received in Excess ofEntitlement

The audit determined that the campaignhad received $109,149 in matching fundpayments to which the candidate was notentitled because the funds were in excessof the campaign's net debts as of his dateof ineligibility, as defined in 11 CFR9033.5. After that date, a candidate mayreceive matching funds only to the extentof the campaign'S net outstanding campaignobligations. 11 CFR 9038.2(b)(1)(i).

Stale-Dated Coomittee ChecksAudit staff identified nine stale-dated

committee checks, totaling $1,161, that hadnever been cashed by the payees. Under11 CFR 9038.6, the total amount of suchoutstanding committee checks are repayable.

Expenses Incurred Aftet" Date ofIneligibility

Commission regulations provide thatexpenses incurred after a candidate's dateof ineligibility are not considered quali­fied campaign expenses unless they relateto winding down costs. Expenses incurredbefore the date of ineligibility for goodsor services received after that date arealso considered nonqualified campaignexpenses. 11 CFR 9034.4(a)(3) and (b)(3).The audit report found that the LaRouchecampaign had incurred $213,789 in non­qualified campaign expenses. Under 11 CFR9038.2(b)(2)(iii), a ratio repaymentformula is used to determine what portionof nonqualified campaign expenses weredefrayed with public funds (as opposed toprivate contributions). Application ofthis formula yielded a repayment amount of$40,950.

Expenditures in Excess of the LimitFunds spent in excess of a state limit

are also considered nonqualified campaignexpenses, subject to the ratio repaymentformula. 11 CFR 9034.4(b)(2) and9038.2(b)(2)(ii)(A) and (iii). The auditreport revealed that the campaign hadexceeded the New Hampshire expenditurelimit by $59,034. For purposes of deter­mining the amount of the repayment, certainreductions were made to the amount spent inexcess of the limit. (For example, $22,680was subtracted because these expenses werepaid after the campaign accounts no longercontained any matching funds.) Using theadjusted figure ($18,973) in the repaymentformula, the amount subject to repaymentwas calculated to be $3,634.

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Number 7

f~7r~~-;;~;'~S%~:~s::2UI[~.--'-'--...~~-"'-'--..,...~.~. ~ ::-:...~_..:. _~~~~~~~~_~ -2-~~-=-~~~~ __=: ~~~;:..

1990 DISCLOSURE DIREC'!URYon May 1, 1990, the FEC released the

fifth edition of the Combined Federal/stateDisclosure Directory, a reference toolidentifying where to locate reports orinformation on:o Campaign finance;o Personal finances of officials and

candidates;o Lobbying;o Corporate registrations;o Public financing;o Spending on state initiatives and

referenda;o Candidates on the ballot;o Election results;o voting accessibility; ando Election-related litigation.

The directory covers both federal andstate government offices. The 1990 editionincludes two new sections listing statelegislative committees dealing with elec­tion law and similar committees involved inethics legislation.

To order a copy of the 1990 Directory,call the Public Records Office: 800/424­9530 or 202/376-3140.

15--lt:Nl'H STATISTICS SHCW l«)DERATE INCREASEIN IUJSE AND SENATE CAMPAIGl ACTIVITY

Candidates for 1990 U.S. House andSenate seats raised more than $192 millionand spent $127 million during the first 15months of the election cycle (January 1,1989, through March 31, 1990). When com­pared with the same period for the 1988election cycle, 1990 campaign receiptsincreased by 7 percent ($12.6 million)while spending rose 12 percent ($13.9million). An FEC press release issued May8, 1990, provides summary data on the 15­month activity of 1990 House and Senatecandidates and comparable data for 1986 and1988 campaigns.

Based on those statistics, the chartsbelow show the financial activity of 1990House candidates and compare the sources ofreceipts for 1986, 1988 and 1990 Housecandidates.

Chart IReceipts and Disbursements of 1990House Candidates(January 1,1989, through March 31, 1990)

PUBLIC APPFAlU\NCES

7/16-20 Conference of CanadianElection Officials

st. John's, NewfoundlandChairman Lee Ann Elliott

7/29-8/2 Council of State GovernmentsManchester, New HampshireN. Bradley Litchfield,Associate General Counselfor Policy

Incumbents· Challengers Open SeatCandidates

o

45

15

30

Millions of Dollars90

_Receipts

_ Disbursements

60

75

BellcoreLivingston, New JerseyN. Bradley Litchfield,Associate General Counselfor Policy

8/16

8/1 Iowa State Association ofCounty Auditors

Cedar Rapids, IowaWilliam Kimberling,

Clearinghouse on ElectionAdministration

No. ofCandidates 413 527 211

6

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Number 7

House Candidates'It Sources of Receipts:

First 15 Months

Chart IIIncumbents

Millions of Dollars

1-- :'" I Contributions from Individuals

_ Contributions from PACs

_ Contributions and Loans fromCandidate

_ Other Loans

_ Other Receipts 1

90

75

60

45

30

15

o1986

No. ot Candidates 396

.-:. .. ... , ~ - .,

~~~~i.~~\·:~f:-~·:

1988

413

1990

413

1990

211

1988

182

o

3

9

6

18

12 f----------l

15

1986

No. ofCandidates 227

Chart IVOpen Seat Candidates

Millions of Dollars 2

1990

527

1988

606

I-------,-----~::-l-------j_:;; _:;~~?J;--r-r.===:==:::::=;--::::~~~~:~2i:

~:J~:

e Chart IIIChallengers

Millions of Dollars 2

18

15

12

9

6

3

01986

No. ofCandidates 638

• , Other receipts consist of contributions from party committees, transfers (such as joint fundraising proceeds but notfunds transferred from committees authorized by the candidate for the current campaign), refunds and rebates, and interestincome.

2Note change in scale between Chart II and Charts III and IV.

7

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Number7

NEW PROCEDURES FOR INVESTICATIOOSOn April 26, 1990, the commdssion

adopted a new practice permitting theOffice of General Counsel (OGC) to conductinformal investigations of enforcementcases (MURs or Matters Under Review)without seeking advance approval from theCommission. OGC will initiate infoDmaIinvestigation and discovery only after theCommission has found "reason to believe."(A "reason to believe" finding means theCommission believes that an investigationshould be conducted in order to determinewhether the respondent has violated thelaw.) Under former procedures, OGC usedmore formal methods of obtaining informa­tion, such as subpoenas and orders, afterfirst obtaining Commission approval. OGCproposed the new practice to shorten thetime it takes to process an enforcementcase and to foster cooperation fromwitnesses and respondents.

MURS RELEASED 'ID THE PUBLICListed below are MURs (FEC enforcment

cases) recently released for public review.The list is based on the FEC press releasesof May 23 and June 1, 1990. Files onclosed MURs are available for review in thePublic Records Office.

Unless otherwise noted, civil penaltiesresult from conciliation agreements reachedbetween the respondents and the Commission.

MUR 2766Respondents: (a) Friends of Connie Mack(FL) and treasurer; (b) Auto Dealers andDrivers for Free Trade political ActionCommittee (NY) and treasurer; (c) Repre­sentative Connie Mack (FL); (d) Hecht Re­Election Committee (NV) and treasurer; (e)Senator Chic Hecht (NV)COOIplainant: Robert F. Bauer, DemocraticSenatorial Campaign Committee (DC)Subject: Independent expenditures; exces­sive contributions; inadequate disclosureDisposition: (a) $3,500 civil penalty(inadequate dislosure); (b) failed to findreason to believe; (c)-(e) no reason tobelieve

MURS 3016/2973Respondents: State Democratic ExecutiveCommittee of Alabama and treasurerComplainant: FEC initiated

8

SUbject: Failure to report on timeDisposition: $3,800 civil penalty

MUR 1438Respondents: (a) Harvey rurgatch (CA); (b)J. David Dominelli (CA)Complainant: FEC initiatedSubject: Independent expendituresDisposition: (a) U.S. District Court Judg­ment: $25,000 civil penalty; (b) U.S. Dis­trict Court Judgment: $8,471 civil penalty

MUR 2415Respondents: Reagan-Bush' 84 (generalelection committee) (DC) and treasurerCOmplainant: FEC initiatedSUbject: Failure to retain and furnishrecordsDisposition: $2,500 civil penalty

MURS 2465/1616/1557Respondents: (a) Seminole Tribe ofFlorida; (b) James E. Billie (FL); (c) Mar­cellus Osceola (FL); (d) Howard E. Tommie(FL); (e) Stephen H. Whilden (FL)Complainant: Paul Harvill (FL) (1616/1557); FEC initiated (2465)SUbject: Contributions made in the name ofanother; excessive contributions, failureto register and report as a politicalconunitteeDisposition: (a) and (b) $32,000 civilpenalty; (c) and (d) reason to believe buttook no further action; (e) reason tobelieve (Commission could not locaterespondent to serve him with GeneralCounsel's probable cause brief)

IAST-MlNUTE CCN1'RIBurrrns:46-1UJR REPORTIN:i

This article explains the specialnotices that candidate committees must fileif they receive contributions of $1,000 ormore shortly before an election. Thesenotices are referred to as 48-hour noticesbecause they are due within 48 hours of thereceipt of the contribution.

Who ReportsThe authorized candidate committee that

receives the last-minute contribution (notthe contributor) must file the 48-hournotice. •

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

•

•

•

July 1990

What Triggers 48-Hour ReportingA candidate committee must file a 48­

hour notice if it receives a contributionof $1,000 or more after the close of booksfor the pre-election report but more than48 hours before the election. 2 U.S.C.S434(a)(6); 11 CFR 104.5(f).

Please note that the 48-hour noticerequirement applies to all types ofcontributions, including:o In-kind contributions;o Loans (other than bank loans);o Guarantees and endorsements of bank

loans; ando Contributions and loans from the

candidate.

What to ReportThe committee must disclose the follow­

ing information in the notice:o The name of the candidate;o The office sought;o The identification of the contributor

(i.e., full name, address and, forindividuals, occupation and employer);and

o The date and amount of the contribution.2 U.S.C. S434(a)(6); 11 CFR 104.5(f).

Unlike regular reports, the 48-hournotice does not require the treasurer'ssignature. AD 1988-32.

When to ReportA 48-hour notice is due within 48 hours

of the committee's receipt of the contribu­tion. The committee must itemize the con­tribution a second time on its nextregularly scheduled report. 2 u.S.C."S434(a)(6); 11 CFR 104.5(f).

Filing on TimeTo ensure that a notice is filed within

48 hours, the committee may use a mailgram,a telegram or an express mail service.Certified, registered and first-class mailare acceptable methods of sending a notice,provided the notice is received at theappropriate filing office by the 48-hourdeadline. In the case of a 48-hour notice,the postmark date is not significant forpurposes of filing on time. AD 1988-32.

Where to FileAuthorized committees of House and

Senate candidates file with the Clerk ofthe House or the Secretary of the Senate,as appropriate. Under no circumstancesshould House and Senate committees filewith the FEC. Authorized committees ofPresidential candidates, however, do filewith the FEC. 2 U.S.C. §432(g); 11 CFR105.1-105.3.

9

Volume 16, Number 7

House and Senate candidate committeesmust simultaneously file copies of 48-hournotices with the Secretary of State (orequivalent officer) in the state in whichthe candidate is seeking election.2 U.S.C. S439(a) (2) (B); 11 CFR 108.3.Presidential candidate committees shouldconsult 2 U.S.C. S439(a) (2) (A) forrequirements on filing with state offices.

LlIST-MINUTE INDEPENDENT EXPENDIWRES:24-HOOR REPORTIt«i

This article explains the 24-hourreporting of independent expendituresaggregating $1,000 or more that are madeshortly before an election.

Who ReportsThe person who makes the last-minute

independent expenditure (i.e., a regis­tered1political committee, an unregisteredgroup or an individual) is responsible forfiling the 24-hour report.

Definition of Independent ExpenditureAn independent expenditure is an expen­

diture for a communication which expresslyadvocates the election or defeat of aclearly identified candidate and which isnot made with the cooperation or prior con­sent of, or in consultation with, or at therequest or suggestion of, any candidate orhis or her authorized committees or agents.2 U.S.C. §431(17); 11 CFR 100.16 and109.1(a).

What Triggers 24-Hour ReportingThe requirement to file a 24-hour

report is triggered when a person makesindependent expenditures aggregating $1,000or more between 2 and 20 days before theelection. 2 U.S.C. §434(c); 11 CFR104.4(b), 104.5(g) and 109~2(b).

When to ReportThe report on last-minute independent

expenditures is due within 24 hours afterthe expenditure is made.

In addition, the person making theexpenditures must disclose them a secondtime in the report due at the end of thereporting period during which the expendi-

(continued)

IAn unregistered group whose federal elec­tion activity exceeds $1,000 in calendaryear may be required to register and reportas a federal political committee. 11 CFR100.5(a).

July 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16, Number7

tures were made. 2 U.S.C. §434(c)i 11 CFRl04.4(a) and (b), l04.5(g), and 109.2(a)(2)and (b).

What to ReportThe following information must be dis­

closed in a 24-hour report:a The committee's name, address and FEC

identification number or, in the case ofan individual or group, the name,address, occupation and employer of theindividual responsible for reporting;

o The name and address of the payee (i.e.,the vendor or other person who receivespayment for providing goods or servicesrelated to the independent expenditure);

o The date, amount and purpose of theexpendi ture; and

a The name of the candidate, the officesought, and whether the expenditure wasmade to support or oppose the candidate.

A 24-hour report must also include anotarized statement certifying that theexpendi ture was made without the coopera­tion or consent of any candidate or author­i zed conuni. t tee.

The above information may be disclosedin a statement or on an FEC reporting form(Schedule E for political committees, Form5 for individuals and groups). The PACtreasurer or the individual reporting theinformation must sign the statement orform. 2 U.S.C. §434(c)i 11 CFR 104.4(b),104.5(g) and 109.2(b).

Filing on TimeIn order to meet the 24-hour deadline,

the report must be delivered by hand orthrough an express mail service. (The needfor a signature and notarized statementprecludes the use of telegrams ormailgrams. 11 CFR 104.14(a).)

Where to FileReports on last-minute independent

expenditures that support or oppose Houseor Senate candidates are filed with theClerk of the House or the Secretary of theSenate, as appropriate. A copy of thereport must also be filed with theSecretary of State (or equivalent officer)of the state in which the candidate seekselection.

Reports on last-minute independentexpenditures that support or opposePresidential candidates are filed with theFEC and with the secretary of State (orequivalent officer) of the state in whichthe expenditure was made. 11 CFR 104.4 (c) •

10

PUBLIC ACCESS 'lO LAST-MINlJl'ETRANSACTICIfS

The Public Records Office makesavailable computer indexes on last­minute contributions and independentexpenditures. A printout indexed bycandidate name (the E Index) lists 48­hour notices on contributions filed bythe candidate's committee. Anotherprintout on independent expendituresis indexed by both the name of theperson making the expendi ture and thename of the candidate supported oropposed.

Shortly before the general elec­tion, the office produces a daily listof 48-hour reports.

To order copies of the independ­ent expenditure index or indexes onindividual candidates showing last­minute reports, call the PublicRecords Office: 800/424-9530 or 202/376-3140.

ELECTICN CASE LAW 89on May 31, 1990, the FEC's National

Clearinghouse on Election Administrationreleased Election Case Law 89, an overviewof election law as applied by state andfederal appellate courts. The volumeprovides a survey of the judicial treatmentof election-related issues, among themreapportionment, ballot access and voterregistration. (Not covered lare casesrelated to campaign finance. ) Eachchapter addresses a separate issue, openingwith a summary of the current state of thelaw, followed by summaries of leading courtcases. Each chapter also contains synopsesof other selected cases and a bibliographyof legal literature.

Tb order, call the Clearinghouse at800/424-9530 or 202/376-5670. The publica­tion has been distributed throughout theunited states to libraries participating inthe Federal Depository Library Program.

lselected Court Case Abstracts summarizescases related to the Federal ElectionCampaign Act. To order a copy, call800/424-9530 or 202/376-3140. •

.luly 1990 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Volume 16,Number 7

•

The first number in eachcitation refers to the "number"(month) of the 1990 Recordissue in which the articleappeared; the second number,following the colon, indicatesthe page number in that issue.

ADVISORY OPINICNS1989-21: Fundraising by sale

proprietor in cooperationwith candidates, 1:9

1989-25: Preemption of statelaw limiting party spendingon behalf of candidates, 1:10

1989-26: Automatic banktransfers from contributor'saccount to candidate commit­tee's account, 1:11

1989-27: Act's preemption ofstate law governing solicita­tions by state employees, 2:2

1989-28: Voter guides distrib­uted by nonprofit corpora­tion, 3:9

1989-29: PAC established bycompany owned by foreignprincipal, 2: 3

1989-30: Payment to Senator forteaching course, 2:4

1990-1: Corporation's sale of900-line fundraising serviceto c~didates, 4:3

1990-2: Candidate's use of ex­cess campaign funds to secureloan for party committee, 4: 5

1990-3: PAC's sale of advertis­ing space in newsletter, 5:3

1990-4: Use of credit cards tocharge combined dues/contri­bution payments, 7: 1

1990-5: Newsletter published bycandidate, 6:4

1990-6: preemption of Oregonlaw prohibiting charitablematching plan for PACcontributions, 7:2

COURT CASESAustin v. Michigan State

Chamber of Commerce, 5:5FEC v.

- FranklIn, 1:13- Friends of Isaiah Fletcher

Committee , 7: 4- Furgatch (83-0596-GT(M)),

2:7- Life Amendment PAC, Inc.

(89-1429), 4:7- Mann for Congress

Committee, 7:5- National Right to wo~k

Committee, Inc., 5:7- NY State Conservative

pa~tYl1984 Victory Fund(87-3309), 6:7

- Working Names, Inc. (87­2467-GAG), 7:4

- Wo~kin9 Names, Inc. (90­1009--eJ1.G), 7: 4

v. FEe- Common Cause

(89-0524(GAG)), 3:11- Dolan, 5:7

11

- Fauche~ and Maine Right toLife Committee, Inc.(90-0112-B), 6: 7

- National Rifle Association(89-3011), 2:7

MUR Sl1I'IMARIESMUR 2823: Excessive contribu­

tion ~eceived by candidatecommittee, 2:4

MUR 2599: Repo~ting errors byCong~essional campaign, 4:6

MUR 3009: Excessive coordinatedexpenditures by state partycommittee, 6: 5

800 LINEBasic recordkeeping rules, 4:8Combined dues/solicitation

statements, 1:17Coordinated party expenditu~es,

3:6Designating a principal cam-

paign committee, 1:19Disclaimer notices, 5:8Exempt party activities, 5:10Last-minute contributions: 48-

hour ~epo(ting, 7:8Last-minute independent expend­

itures: 24-hour reporting,7:9

New treasurer, 2:9Transfers from candidate'S non­

federal committee to federalcommittee, ·6:8

When reimbursements are re­quired in SSF fundraising,2:8

July 1990

CIIAfGi.: OF ADDRESS

FEDERAL ELECTION COMrvllSSION Volume 16, Number7

Political CommdtteesT~easurers of registered political committees automatically receive the Record.

A change of address by a political committee (or any change to information disclosedon the Statement of Organization) must, by law, be made in writing on FEe Form 1 o~ byletter. The treasurer must sign the amendment and file it with the Secretary of theSenate, the Clerk of the House o~ the FEe (as appropriate) and with the appropriatestate office.

other SUbscribersRecord subscribers who are not registe~ed political committees should include the

following information when requesting a change of address:o Subscription number (located on the upper left hand corner of the mailing label);a Name of the subscriber;o Old address; ando New address.

Subscribers (other than political committees) may correct their addresses byphone as well as by mail.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

Bulk Rate MailPostage and Fees Paid

Federal Election CommissionPermit Number G-31

•