FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1050 FIRST STREET, N.E.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

In the Matter of ) 

 ) MUR 7879 

NRA Victory Fund, Inc. ) 

) 

 

STATEMENT OF REASONS OF CHAIRMAN ALLEN DICKERSON 

AND COMMISSIONERS SEAN J. COOKSEY AND JAMES E. “TREY” TRAINOR, III

 Considering prior Commission action on procedurally similar matters, informed by 

Commission-approved referral thresholds, we could not support moving forward in this matter 

on the allegation that NRA Victory Fund, Inc. (“NRA-VF”) failed to timely report certain 

information about some of its contributors. Pursuant to governing law, we provide this statement 

to explain our reasoning for voting in support of the Office of General Counsel (“OGC”)’s 

recommendation to dismiss this matter as exercise of prosecutorial discretion.1

 On February 2, 2021, the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) sent NRA-VF a Request 

for Additional Information (“RFAI”) pertaining to its 2020 Post-General Report. An RFAI is 

issued “when an FEC Campaign Finance Analyst needs additional clarification or identifies an 

error, omission or possible prohibited activity.”2 An RFAI provides “an opportunity to correct or 

explain report information for the public record.” 3 RFAIs are issued pursuant to a Commissionapproved review policy. An RFAI is not an allegation of wrongdoing against the recipient. 

Pursuant to a 1976 Commission policy, the FEC makes all RFAIs public at the time they are 

1 See Dem. Cong. Campaign Comm. v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 831 F.2d 1131, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (“DCCC”) 

(establishing requirement that “[t]he Commission or the individual Commissioners” must provide a statement of 

reasons why the agency “rejected or failed to follow the General Counsel’s recommendation”); Common Cause v. 

Fed. Election Comm’n, 842 F.2d 436, 453 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (“A statement of reasons...is necessary to allow 

meaningful judicial review of the Commission’s decision not to proceed”); see also id. at 451 (R.B. Ginsburg, J., 

dissenting in part and concurring in part) (“I concur in part III of the court’s opinion holding the DCCC rule 

applicable, prospectively, to all Commission dismissal orders based on tie votes when the dismissal is contrary to the 

recommendation of the FEC General Counsel”); Nat’l Republican Senatorial Comm. v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 966 

F.2d 1471, 1476 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (“We further held that, to make judicial review a meaningful exercise, the three 

Commissioners who voted to dismiss must provide a statement of their reasons for so voting. Since those 

Commissioners constitute a controlling group for purposes of the decision, their rationale necessarily states the 

agency’s reasons for acting as it did”) (citation omitted); Campaign Legal Ctr. & Democracy 21 v. Fed. Election 

Comm’n, 952 F.3d 352, 355 (D.C. Cir. 2020).

2 https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/request-additional-information/ (accessed Aug. 1, 2022). 

3 Id. 

MUR787900056
MUR787900057
matter, we note that the respondent’s amended reports and narrative responses to the RFAI, 

complaint, and amended complaint provide a substantially complete public record of the 

contributions at issue. 

 For the reasons set forth above, we agreed with OGC’s recommendation not to pursue 

this matter further, as a matter of prosecutorial discretion.

9

 

9/7/2022 

____________________ __________________________ 

Date Allen J. Dickerson 

Chairman

9/7/2022 

____________________ __________________________ 

Date Sean J. Cooksey 

Commissioner

9/7/2022 

___________________ __________________________ 

Date James E. “Trey” Trainor, III

Commissioner 

fact, part of the enforcement process and subject to the Act’s confidentiality provisions pertaining to enforcement 

actions. See generally 52 U.S.C. § 30109 (a)(12)(A). It is unclear whether the Commission considered these issues 

when it adopted the policy making RFAIs public upon issuance. We believe the time has come for the Commission 

to consider these questions. 

9 Chairman Dickerson and Commissioners Cooksey and Trainor supported OGC’s recommendations to dismiss as a 

matter of prosecutorial discretion the allegations that NRA Victory Fund, Inc., and Christina M. Majors in her 

official capacity as treasurer violated 52 U.S.C. § 30104(b)(3)(A) and 11 C.F.R. § 104.3(a)(4) by failing to report 

employer and occupation information for individual contributors. See MUR 7879, Certification dated Jun. 23, 2022. 

MUR787900058