146 [7 9 O p
. A tt ’y

All statutory

ref erences in this opinion are to Ar ticle 33. 1 E LECT I ONS

) C ANDI DATES

) D ISB URSEMENT U NDER THE F A IR C AMPA I GN F I NA NC I NG A CT T O W RI TE -I N C ANDI DATES

J ul y29, 1994

M r
. G ene M

. R aynor A dm i nis tr at or S t a t e Admi n is tr a t i v e Bo a r d o f El e c t i o n L a ws

Y ou have a s ked ouropi ni on conce r n ing t he i nt erpr et at i on of ce rt ain p rov isi o n s o f th e F air C am p aign F inan cing A ct (th e “ A ct”), A r t i cl e 33, §31- 1 et

s eq. of t he M ary l and C ode, as t hat A ctappl i es to w ri te -i n c a n d idates. S p ec ifi ca ll y , y o u r qu esti o n is w h ethe r a 1 w r i t e- i n candi dat e w ho qual i fi es forpubl ic f u n ds i n t he gene r al el ect i on i s ent i t l ed t o r ece i ve a n “equa l s har e” of t he money re m a in in g in th e F u n d

. F or t he reasons setfort h b el ow , w e con cl ud e t hat an e lig ib le w r i t e-in ca n d ida t e i n t he gene r al el ect i on )t hati s , one w ho has raised at l ea st $1 4 9 , 6 7 0 in “s ee d m o n ey ” a n d w h o m ee ts the A ct’s othe rr e qu i r e ment s ) i s ent i t l ed t o r ece i ve an “ equal s har e” of t he m o n e yre m a in in g in th e F u n d

. T h u s, w e re a f f irm a d v ice p ro v id e d to candi dat es l as ty earbyt he St at e A dm i ni str ati ve B oar d of El ect i on L aw s. Sum m aryof t he Fai rC ampai gn Fi nanci ng Fund at8 ( M ay 1 9 9 3 ).

I Backg r ound I n a r ece nt opi ni on, w e addr es s ed s ever al i nt erpr et i ve i ssue s r el at ed t o t he pr oces s by w hi ch candi dat es qual i fyforpubl i c fundi ng p u rs u a n t to th e A c t. See 79 O pi ni ons of

the At t or ney G ener al136 ( 1994)

. Y our pr es ent i nqui r y i nvol ves an aspe ct of t he di s bur s ement of publ i c funds t o qual i fi ed ca ndi dat es
. A s expl ai ned i n t hat o p in io n , d isb u rse m e n ts a re m a d e in th e f o llo w in g m a n n e r:G en. 146] 147

Th at su bs e c tio n also prov ide s: “ An e lig ibl e c andidate who did 2 not rec eive public c ontributions in the primar y , but is a nomi n ee i n the gen eral election, may

only rec eive public c ontributions in the g eneral el ection if the candidatedid not spend more than the max imum expenditure limitin the primary .”

H a lf of t he fund i s t o be dis t ri bu t ed to el i gi bl e ca ndi dat es i n t h e R epubl i can a nd D emocr at i c pr i m aryel ect i ons
. §31- 4( b)

. I n a c o n tes ted p rim a ry , ea c h e li g ib le c a n d id a te is t o r ece i ved $1 i n publ i c contr i buti o n s for every$2 i n eli gibl e pri vate contr i bu t i on s. § 3 1 -5 (b )(2 ). If

a c a n d id a te is u n o p p o se d in th e p rim a ry , the c a n d id a te is to re c e iv e $ 1 in p u b lic c o n trib u tio n s f

o r e v e r y $ 3 in e lig ib le pr i vat e contr i but i ons
. §31- 5( b) ( 3)

. T he other hal f of t he fund ( i.e ., t he hal f notus ed fort he pr i m ary ) , pl us anym oneyl eftoverfrom t he pri m aryi s t o b e distrib uted “i n eq ual s hares” t o e l i g i b l e c a n d i d a t e s i n t h e g e n e r a l e l e c t i on, in c lu d in g w rite- in a n d p e tit io n c a n d id a tes if o therw ise eli g ible. § 3 1 -5(c ). 79 O pi ni ons of

the At t or ney G ener al136 at139. T hus , t her e ar e t w o t ypes of di s bur s ement s undert he A ct

. For t he pri m ar y el ect i on, an el i gi bl e candi dat e re cei ves , pur s uantt o t he sta tu to ryf

o rm u la, “ m a tc h in g f u n d s” f o r e lig ib le p riv a te contr i but i ons
. §31- 5( b)

. For t he gene r al el ect i on, how ever , t he publ i c funds ar e di s t r i but ed i n “equa l s har es
. ” §31- 5( c) ( 2)

. Y ou 2 have now as ked us t o cons i der an ew , and t o expl ai n i n det ai l , t he concl us i on r efl ect ed i n bot h ourpr i oropi ni on and i n advi ce di s t r i but ed l as t y ear by t h e S tat e B oar d

)th a t a w rite- in c a n d id a te w ho qual i fi es for publ i c funds i n t he gener al el ect i on i s ent i t l ed t o an
“ e q u a l s h a re ” o f

th e g e n e ra l e le c tio n d is b u rs e m e n t.

II W r i t e - I n C andi dat e s and t he Fund A s de f i n e d b y § 1

- 1 ( a ) ( 2 0 ) , a “ wr i t e - i n c a n d i d a t e ” me a n s “a person w ho se nam e w i l l no tapp ear on t he b al l ot butw ho fi l es a cert i fi cat e of c andi dacyi n acc or dance w i t h §4D

- 1 .

. . . ” U ndert he148 [7 9 O p
. A tt ’y

Mary land’ s so- c a lle d “ so relos e r”prov isi on proh ibi ts t

hename 3 of a c andidate who lost in the prim ary elec tion from being printed on the g eneral elec tio nballot. §8-2(a) . A write- in candidate ’s name doe s not a pp e ar o n th e ballo t, so this prov isi on do e s not pr e ve nt a l os ingc andidate in a primary

from runningas a write-in candidate in theg eneral elec tion. Intere stingly , the orig inal 1974 leg isl at i on included a provision 4 stating: “No per son who re ceive d matchingpay ments as a c andidate in a primary elec tion and lost the primary elec tion is eligi b l e t o receive a ny g e ne ral e le c tio n p ub licc ontribut ion.”Sin c e a prima ry los e r c ou ld o nly participate i n th e general e lection as a write-in c andidate, this provision wou ld havee xclu de d wri te -i n c andidate s f ro m pa rtic ipatin gin t

heAc t. Ho w e v e r , th e p r o v is io n w a s d e le te d f r o m th e f in a l v e r s io n o f the 1974 leg islation. E lecti o n C o d e , w ri te-in c an d idates a re n o t perm itted in a p ri m ary e lec tio n . § 5 -3 (f

). R a th e r, th e p r im a rye lec tio n is lim ited to r e c o g n iz e d p o litic a l p a rt ie s
. See § 5 -1 ; B ar nhar tv. M andel , 3 1 1 F. Supp. 814 ( D

. M d. 1970)

. I n t he gene r al el ect i on, how ever , a per s on w h o f iles a c e rtifi c a te o f

c a n d id a c yin a c c o rd a n c e w ith th e law is el i gi bl e t o be a w r i t e- i n candi dat e. 3
Pr i or t o 1986, t he A ct ’ s appl i cat i on t o w r i t e- i n candi dat es w as n o t cle a r. W h ile the A c t a s o rig in a lly in tro d u c e d in 1 9 7 4 e x p re ss ly i ncl uded pr ovi s i ons fori nd ep en dent( pet i t i on) candi dat es and u n o p p o se d p rim a ryn o m in e e s, th e re w a s n o re f e re n c e to w rite- in c a n d id a te s
. See Cha p t e r 7 2 9 ( Hou s e Bi l l 5 1 0 ) o f t h e La w s of M ary l and 1974. H ow ever , a N ovember 25, 1974 l et ter f r om t hen A s s i s t antA t t or neyG ener al G eor ge A

. N i l s on t o t he Execut i ve D i r ect orof t he Task For ce to St udyC ampai gn Fi nanci ng advi s ed t hat , al t hough t he matt er w as notal t ogetherfr ee f r om doubt , t he d e f in it io n o f

“ c a n d id a te” in th e A c t ar g u a b lyin c lu d e d a w rite- in c a n d id a te. R e ly in g o n th a t lette r, th e T a sk F o rc e su b se q u e n tly re c o m m e n d e d “ th a t in a g e n e ra l ele c tio n a ll m a jo r an d m in o r p a rty and ind epende ntcandi dat es be el i gi bl e forpubl i c fi nanci ng. ” The T as k For ce then spe ci fi cal l yr ecomm ended that“unoppos ed and w ri t e-i n can didat es shou ld n o t be el i gibl e for pu bli c fun ds. ” T ask F o rce to S tu d y C a m p aign F inan cing , F ir st R ep o rt1 6 (Jan u ary 1 9 7 5 ). 4
I n the y ear s fol l ow i ng t he Task For ce r epor t , l i t t l e w as done w i t h t he A ct , s ave occa s i onal l egi s l at i on t o del ayi t s i m pl ement at i on, u n til a m a

jo r o v e r h a u l o f th e A c t in 1 9 8 6

. See 79 O pi ni ons of

the A tt or ney G ener al136 at138- 39. W hatr ol e the 1975 Task For ceG en. 146] 149

In addition, the candidate must file with the State B oard a notice 5 of intention to qualify

and a request for a public contribution not later than five day s afte r the S tate Board has decla red the identities of the ca

ndidates fo r G ov e rn or

and L ieutena nt G ov ern or

in t heg e ne ral e le c tio n; t

heState Boa rd now a nticipates that the de adline for the notice a

nd reque st will be Septe mber 2 8, 19 94 , b ut t his dateis s ub

ject to chang e . T hec andidate must also fi l e a ce rt ificateof ca ndidacy prior to re questingpublic funds and a ff ir m th at th e c andidatedid

no t e xce e d th e maximum sp e ndinglim it in the primary elec tion, if the write- in candidatesought nomination in the primary . Write-in candidate s who areseekingpublic money from the Fund must file a c ertificate of c andidac y on or bef

ore thedeadline f

or reque sting pu

b li cf unds discussed above , rathe r than the de adline provide d in §4D-1(c ). r epor tm ayhave pl ay ed i n t he 1986 s ubs t ant i ve amendm ent s i s not c lea r. H o w e v e r, itis c lea r th a t th e T a sk F o rc e ’s p o sitio n o n w rite- in candi dat es w as nots har ed byt he 1986 G ener al A s s embl y . T o t he co n tr ary , H o u se B il l 17 8 1 in 1 9 8 6 sp ec ifi c a ll yad d resse d the A ct’s a p p lica tio n to w rite- in c a n d id a tes a s p a rt o f a d ire c tio n to th e S tate A dm i ni s t r at orof El ect i on L aw s t o “pr om ul gat e co m pr ehens i ve re g u la tio n s to c a rr y o u t th e p u rp o s e s a n d re q u ir e m e n ts o f [ th e A c t] .” N ow c o d i fi ed as §3 1-4(c) (8) , t he A ctdir ect s that these re g u latio n s a re to in c lu d e p ro v isio n s re g a rd in g d istrib u tio n s to :

(i) u n o p p o se d c a n d id a tes ; ( i i ) candi dat es w ho ar e notm ember s of t he tw o pr i nci pal pol i t i cal par t i es ; and (iii) w r i t e- i n candi dat es . ( E mp h a s i s a d d e d

. ) T h e i mp l e me n t i n g r e g u l a t i o n s , CO M AR 1 4 .0 2 .1 3 .0 8 , s p e c if

ica lly p ro v id e a s f

o llo w s: “ A w rite- in c a n d id a te w ho has fi l ed a c er t i fi cate of ca ndi dacyw hi ch meet s t he r equi r ement s of l aw m ayr ece i ve a publ i c contr i but i on i f t he candi dat e meet s t he r equi r ement s of t he A ctand thi s chapt er
. ” See als o C O M A R 14

. 02

. 13

. 02 B (2 ) (“ ‘c a n d id a te’ in c lu d es a G o vernor/ L i eutenant G ov ernor unitw hich: (i ) Fi l es i n a p art y pr i m ar y ; or( i i ) B ecomes a gene r al el ect i on candi dat e byanym eans ot hert han nomi nat i on i n a par t y pr i m ary . ”) O ne re qui r ement i s t hat t he w r i t e- i n candi dat e have r ai s ed atl eas tt he mi ni m um amount of “s eed money , ” $149, 670. 5150 [7 9 O p
. A tt ’y

As o rig in a lly intro d

u c e d , H o u s e B il l 5 1 0 in 1 9 7 4 p r o v id ed for 6 matchingfunds in a primar y elec tion and a lump sumdisbursement in the g eneral elec tion. However , duringconsi d er at i on of the bill, an amendment, a s ex p l ained by the Task F orce , eliminated primary c andidate s f

ro m pu bli c fi na nc ingand

re qu ir e d th at “pa

rtia l pu bli c financ ing [ be] direc ted t owards g eneral election candidates.” Task Forc e Report at 6. TheTask F orcerec ommended as a “top priority” for the 1975 Gene ral Asse mbly

that public financ ing be made available to both primary and g eneral elec tion candidates. SeeTask F orceReport at 7, 15. Si nce a w r i t e- i n candi dacyi s only p erm i t t ed i n t he gene r al e lec tion, i tfoll ow s that the regu l at i on speaks t o the w ri t e-in candi dat e’ s el i gi bi l i t yforgener al el ect i on ( “equa l s hares ”) di s bur s ement , notm at chi ng funds

. W e expl or e thi s asp ec t o f t he q u e s tio n in P a rt II I b e lo w . III

P u b li c F u n d D isbu rse m en ts P rio r to 1 9 8 6 , the d isb u rse m e n t o f p u b lic f u n d s w a s lim ited to m a tc h in g f

u n d s in th e g e n e ra l ele c tio n
. T h e 1 9 8 6 a m e n d m e n ts 6 e sta b lish e d th e tw o typ e s o f d isb u rse m e n ts b rie f lyo u tli n e d in P a rt I a b o v e . N o w c o d if

ied a s § 3 1 -5 , the A c t sp e c if ica llyp ro v id e s: ( b) ( 1) T he St at e B oar d s hal l or der d is bur s ement of funds , des i gnat ed for d is b u rse m e n t in th e p rim a ry , as p ro v id e d in t hi s s ubs ect i on. ( 2) C andi dat es w ho ar e oppos ed i n t he p rim a ry sh al l re c e iv e $ 1 in p u b lic c o n trib u tio n s f

o r e v e ry$ 2 in e lig ib le p riv a te con t ri bu t i on s. (3 ) C a n d id a tes w h o a re u n o p p o se d in th e p rim a rysh a ll rec e iv e $ 1 in p u b lic c on t ri bu t i on s for every$3 i n eli gibl e pri vate con t ri bu t i on s. ( c) ( 1) T he St at e B oard s hal l or der d isb u rse m e n t in th e g e n e ra l ele c tio n o f a ll m oneyr emai ni ng i n t he Fund, i ncl udi ngG en. 146] 151

m oneyr emai ni ng fr om t he por t i on des i gnat ed for t he pr i m ary , as pr ovi ded i n t hi s s ubs ect i on. (2) A ll eli g ible ca n d idates w h o are nom i nees s hal l r ece i ve equa l s har es of t he Fund. ( 3) I f a candi dat e i s unoppos ed on the g e n e ra l ele c tio n b a llo t, th e c a n d id a te s h a ll recei ve n o p ub l i c con t ri bu t i on s. ( 4 ) An e l i g i b l e c a n d i d a t e who d i d not r e c e i v e p u b l i c c o n t r i b u t i o n s i n t h e p r i m a r y, buti s a nomi nee i n t he gene r al el ec ti on, m ay onl yr ece i ve publ i c contr i bu ti ons i n t he gener al el ect i on i f t he candi dat e di d nots pend m o re than t he m axim um exp end i ture l i m i tin t h e p r i m a r y. I n l i ghtof t hi s s t atut or y l anguage , i t i s cl eart hatany“nomi nee i n t he gene r al el ect i on” i s el i gi bl e for an “equa l s har e” di s bur s ement in tha t el ec ti o n
. T rad it ion all y , the term “n o m inee ” re fe rs t o p ri m ary e lec ti on w i nn ers and peti t i on cand i dates , no tw ri t e-i n can didat es. See § 4 -1 (“ N o m ination s fo r of fice

. . . m ayb e m a d e b y p ri m ary el ect i on orpet it ion

. ”). Thus, i tcoul d be ar gued thatt he G ener al A ss e m b ly , thr o u g h th e u se o f th e ter m “ n o m in e e ,” in ten d e d to excl ude w r i t e- i n candi dat es fr om r ece i vi ng a publ i c fund di s bur s ement i n t he gene r al el ect i on. I n ourvi ew , how ever , t he G eneral A ssem blydid not i ntend t o so excl ud e w ri t e-i n can didat es. I n t he fi r s tpl ace , i t i s hi ghl y doubt ful t hat t he t er m “nomi nee” w a s u se d in ten tio n a lly to e x c lu d e w rite- in c a n d id a tes w h e n e a rlier in t he A ct s peci al at t ent i on w as gi ven t o addr es s t he el i gi bi l i t y of w r i t ein c a n d id a te s
. See Par tI I a bove. T hus , w hi l e the s t ar t i ng poi ntof l egi s l at i ve i nt erpr et at i on i s t he l anguage of t he s t atut e i t s el f, the

“ p lain m e a n in g ru le o f c o n stru c tio n is n o t ab so lu te; ra th e r th e sta tu te m us t be cons t rued r eas onabl y w i t h r efe r ence t o t he purpos e, ai m , or pol i cy of t he enac t i ng body

. ” Trac ey v
. Trac ey , 328 M d. 380, 387, 614 A

. 2d 590 ( 1992)

. Fur t her“al l par t s of a stat u te a r e t o be r ead t ogethert o det er m i ne i nt ent , and r econc i l ed and ha r m oni zed t o t he ext entpos s i bl e. ” C ondon v. St at e, 332 M d. 481, 491, 632 A

. 2d 753 (1 9 9 3 ). W ith th e se p re c e p ts in m in d , w e th in k it i s h ig h lyu n lik e ly t hatt he G ener al A s s embl y w o u ld, on t he one ha nd, m andat e the p ro m u lg a tio n o f

re g u latio n s g o v e rn in g d is b u rse m e n ts to w rite- in candi dat es and then, on t he ot her hand, excl ude w r i t e- i n candi dat es152 [7 9 O p
. A tt ’y f ro m th e A c t. R a th e r, w e th in k th e u se o f th e ter m “ n o m in e e ” in §31- 5 w as t he r es ul to f a dra ft i ng over s i ght , nota mani fes t at i on of leg isla tiv e in ten t. O urconcl us i on i s bol s t er ed b y an amendm entthatoccurr ed du r i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e 1 9 8 6 l e g i s l a t i o n
. As i n t r o d u c e d , §31- 4 (b ) p ro v id e d a s f

o llo w s: “ S u b

jec t to th e o th e r re q u ire m e n ts o f th is s ubt i t l e, t he St at e B oar d s hal l di s t r i but e one- hal f of the moneyi n t he Fund t o el i gi bl e ca ndi dat es i n t he pri m ary el ect i on and the r emai ni ng m on eyi n the fun d to el i gibl e cand i dates w ho ar e nom i nees i n t he g en era l el ec ti o n
. ” H o u se B il l 17 8 1 o f 1 9 8 6 (em p h asis ad d ed ). T el l i ng l y , t he em ph asi zed langu age referr i n g to “nom i nees” w as del et ed dur i ng consi d era ti on of the bi l l

. T he exc l us i on of t he t er m “nomi nees ” i n §31- 4( b) , i n our vi ew , i l l us t r at es t hatt he G ener al A s s embl yw as cogni zantof t he conf l i ctbetw een the w o rd “no mi n e e s ” i n t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e s e c t i o n a n d t h e r e q u i r ement m andat i ng t he pr om ul gat i on of r egul at i ons for w ri te

- i n candi dat es l at eri n t he s ect i on. I n ot herw or ds , t he G ener al A s s embl yi nt ended t o en su re the acc es s i bi l i t yof t he Fund t o w r i t e- i n candi dat es and to o k c a re to e lim in a te lan g u a g e su g g e stin g th a t a w rite- in c a n d id a te w a s n o t e n title d to a c c e s s
. See a l so § 3 1 -4(d ) (“ a lle li g ib le candi dat es ”)

. Seemi ngl yi nadvert ent l y , the sam e ca r e w as not ex erc ised in relati o n to the u se o f th e term “n o m inee ” in § 3 1 -5(c ). I f w e w e r e t o r e a d t h e t e r m “ n o m i n e e ” i n § 3 1

- 5 ( c ) l i t e r a l l y, § 3 1 -4 (c )( 8 )( iii) , w ith its e x p lic it re f e re n c e to “ w ri te -i n c a n d id a te s ,” w o u ld b e n e g a te d . T h is w e c a n n o t d o
. See Mont gom er y C ount y v. B uckm an , 333 M d. 516, 523, 636 A

. 2d 448 ( 1994) ( “abs enta cl ear in ten t to th e c o n tra ry , a sta tu te is to b e re a d so th a t n o
.. . p h r a s e is ren d ere d su rplu sag e, sup erf luo u s, m ea n ing less, o r nu g atory ”). Fur t her , even i f t he var i at i on i n l anguage w er e thoughtt o m ake the s tatu te as a w h o le am b igu o u s o n this po int, the S tat e B o ard ’s r egulati on al l ow i ng w r i t e- i n candi dat es t o qual i fyfort he Fund w o u ld b e d e c is iv e
. See 76 O pi ni ons of

the At t or ney G ener al3, 10, n .7 (1 9 9 1 ) a n d a c c o m p a n y in g tex t; s e e g e n e r a lly C h e v r o n , U .S .A ., In c . v. N a tu ra l R e so u rc e s D e

fen se C o u n c il, 4 6 7 U .S . 8 3 7 (1 9 8 4 ).G en. 146] 153 IV C oncl usi on I n s umma r y , i t i s o u r o p i n i o n t h a t a wr i t e - i n c a n d i d a t e w ho r ai s es atl east $ 1 4 9, 670 i n s eed moneybySept ember 28, 1994 and m eet s al l ot hers t atut or yand r egul at ory r equi r ement s m ayobt ai n a s har e of the moneyr emai ni ng i n t he F ai r C ampai gn Fi nanci ng Fund aft ert he pr i m aryel ect i on equal t o t he s har e of a nyot hercandi dat e.

J. Jo sep h C u rran , Jr. A t t or ney G ener al M aryO

. L unden A s s is t antA t t or ney G ener al Ja c k S c h w a rtz C hi ef C ouns el O pi ni ons & Advi ce

E ditor ’s N

ote: T he pr ovi s i ons cons t rued i n t hi s opi ni on ar e curr ent l ycodi fi ed in A rt ic le 3 3 , T itle 1 5 , th e “ P u b lic F in a n c in g A c t.”