FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

Washington, DC 

MEMORANDUM

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJECT: 

The Commission 

Office of the Commission Secretary VFV

February 12, 2024

Comments Regarding AOR 2024-02 (Waters) Drafts A & B

Attached is a comment received on Advisory Opinion Request 2024-02.

Attachment
220 S. Pine St, Suite 109 Sisters, OR 97759 | www.beavercompliance.com

February 12, 2024 

VIA E-MAIL Phone: (949) 441-5352 

Federal Election Commission

1050 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20002 

Re: Comments Regarding Advisory Opinion 2024-02 (Waters) Drafts A and B 

Dear Commissioners: 

On behalf of Congresswoman Maxine Waters and Citizens for Waters (“Requestors”), we submit 

this comment regarding Drafts A and B of Advisory Opinion 2024-02. We urge the Commission 

to approve Draft A and disagree with the conclusion in Draft B that reimbursements from nonfederal committees to Citizens for Waters are prohibited. Requestors will be limited in their 

ability to voice Congresswoman Waters’ endorsements if non-federal committees are prohibited 

from reimbursing Requestors for their pro rata share of the costs to produce and distribute the 

brochures. 

Requestors support the conclusion in Draft A that §30125(e)(1)(A) “does not itself impose any 

standalone duty to report that would not otherwise exist under the Act.”1 Further, imposing the 

reporting requirements of the Act to the non-federal committees would be unnecessarily

duplicative since they are already required to publicly disclose their receipts and disbursements 

pursuant to state laws. 

The statute imposes three separate requirements that federal candidates and their committees 

may not “solicit, receive, direct, transfer, or spend funds in connection with an election for 

Federal office, including funds for any Federal election activity, unless the funds are subject to

the (1) [contribution] limitations, (2) [source] prohibitions and (3) reporting requirements of the 

Act.”2

 Requestors agree with both Draft A and B’s assertion that the brochures must comply 

with the statute’s first two requirements that the reimbursements must from sources that meet the

contribution limitations and source prohibitions of the Act since the brochures constitute federal 

election activity.

Requestors disagree with Draft B’s assertion that the statute imputes the reporting requirements 

of the Act on the non-federal committees simply because the reimbursements are, incidentally, 

federal election activity even though the purpose of the reimbursement is to influence a non1 See Draft A of Advisory Opinion (Waters) 2024-02 at 7. 2 See 52 U.S.C. §30125(e)(1)(A).
Federal Elections Commission

February 12, 2024

Page 2

federal election.

3

 Under the Act, Requestors are required to report the reimbursements to the 

Commission as receipts. 

The statute’s language does not necessarily impose the reporting requirements of the Act on the 

non-federal committees. Reporting to the Commission is required only if payments are

contributions or expenditures as defined by the Act. Contributions and expenditures, in general, 

are defined as payments made for the purpose of influencing a candidate for federal election.

4

Here, the reimbursements at issue are for the purpose of influencing a non-federal election and, 

therefore, do not meet the definitions of contributions or expenditures under the Act. Therefore, 

the non-federal committee, themselves, are not required to report these reimbursements to the 

Commission. Draft B imposes reporting requirements that do not exist. Draft A properly draws 

this conclusion.

In addition to imposing reporting requirements that do not exist, prohibiting non-federal 

committees from reimbursing Requestors to appear on these brochures severely limits their 

ability to benefit from Congresswoman Waters’ endorsement. Congresswoman Waters’

endorsement provides immeasurable value by swaying voters to support or oppose non-federal 

candidates and ballot measures. Without these reimbursements, Requestors must downsize the 

universe of published endorsements and distribution of these brochures to voters to the extent her 

campaign committee can afford these costs. 

Reimbursements from non-federal committees would allow Requestors to supplement the high 

costs of printing and distributing these brochures allowing Requestors to more widely

disseminate Congresswoman Waters’ endorsements to voters which is valuable to these nonfederal candidates and ballot measures.

Requestors strongly urge the Commission to approve Draft A as it properly concludes that these

reimbursements are not subject to additional reporting requirements under the Act. Without 

these reimbursements, Requestors will be limited in their ability to distribute Congresswoman 

Waters’ endorsements of those non-federal candidates and ballot measures that value her ability 

to sway voters. 

We thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to comment on Drafts A and B of 

Advisory Opinion 2024-02.

3 The facts here are distinguishable from the enforcement cases referenced in Draft B. Here, the reimbursements at 

issue are for the purpose of influencing a non-federal election. The enforcement cases cited in Draft B addressed 

funds that were used for the purpose of influencing a federal election and, therefore, contributions and expenditures 

under the Act. Therefore, the non-federal committees were, in fact, subject to the reporting requirements under the 

Act. See Draft B 2004-02 (Waters) footnotes 14-15 at 6. 4 See 52 U.S.C. §§ 30101(8), (9).
Federal Elections Commission

February 12, 2024 

Page 3 

Very Truly Yours, 

Leilani R. Beaver

Counsel for Citizens for Waters

cc: Congresswoman Maxine Waters

 David Gould