FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

1050 FIRST STREET, N.E.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463

BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

In the Matter of ) 

 ) 

Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P., et al. ) MUR 7920

 ) 

STATEMENT OF REASONS OF CHAIRMAN ALLEN DICKERSON 

The complaint in this Matter alleged that Oklahomans for Truth, Responsibility, 

Unity, Markets, & Prosperity (T.R.U.M.P.) and James Tackett, in his official capacity 

as treasurer (“the Committee”) accepted $94,000 in excessive and prohibited 

contributions from two corporations controlled by its treasurer, James Tackett: 

Conservatives for a Great Broken Arrow d/b/a Vote Safe (“Vote Safe”) and Init2 LLC 

d/b/a Win Mail & Design (“Init2 LLC”). Our Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) 

recommended that the Commission find no reason to believe (“RTB”) that the 

Committee violated 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(f) or 30118 by knowingly accepting excessive 

or prohibited contributions, and also find no RTB that Vote Safe or Init2 LLC violated 

52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(a)(1)(C) or 30118 by making excessive or prohibited contributions

because the record indicates that the Committee had intended to file as an 

independent expenditure only committee (“IEOPC”). 

While OGC reaches the correct conclusion in this Matter, I write separately to 

clarify that the law does not require a committee to register as an IEOPC in order to

be one. 

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On June 15, 2020, the Committee registered with the Commission as a 

nonconnected committee and listed Benjamin Minor as its treasurer and custodian of 

records.1 One day later, the Committee filed an amendment designating James David 

Tackett as its treasurer and custodian of records.2 Neither the original nor amended 

Statement of Organization (FEC Form 1) “included a letter expressing an intent to 

1 FEC Form 1, Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P. Statement of Organization (June 15, 2020), 

https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/658/202006159239784658/202006159239784658.pdf. 

2 FEC Form 1, Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P. Amended Statement of Org. (June 16, 2020), 

https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/537/202006169239794537/202006169239794537.pdf. 

MUR792000039
MUR 7920 (Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P., et al.) 

Statement of Reasons

Page 2 of 5 

accept unlimited contributions for the purpose of making only independent 

expenditures.”3

During the Committee’s existence it received $94,000 in total contributions—all 

of which came from Vote Safe and Init2 LLC.4 The Committee’s reports show that it 

disbursed all the funds it received in 2020 to Init2 LLC for communications

supporting or opposing state candidates.5

After the Committee’s disclosure of apparent corporate contributions, the 

Commission’s Reports Analysis Division (“RAD”) sent a Request for Additional 

Information (“RFAI”) to the Committee.6 In response, the treasurer informed RAD 

that the Committee had intended to register as an IEOPC.7 RAD replied that the 

Committee could file a Miscellaneous Report (Form 99) stating that it was an 

IEOPC,8 and the treasurer did so that day.9

Approximately one year later, the Committee filed a termination report disclosing 

zero financial activity, zero cash on hand, and zero debts from January 1, 2021

through July 31, 2021.10 Two days later, RAD approved the termination.11

That same day, a complaint was filed arguing that the Committee’s claim in its 

Form 99 that it intended to be an IEOPC should not be accepted, and therefore that

the Committee violated 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116 and 30118 by accepting excessive and 

prohibited contributions.12

3 First Gen. Counsel’s Rpt. at 2.

4 Id. at 3. 

5 Id. 

6 Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P., RFAI (Aug. 5, 2020),

https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/710/202008050300081710/202008050300081710.pdf

7 Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P, RAD Communications Log (Aug. 26, 2020).

8 Id. 

9 FEC Form 99, Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P. Miscellaneous Report (August 26, 2020), 

https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/192/202008269267005192/202008269267005192.pdf. 

10 Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P., Termination Report (Aug. 2, 2021), 

https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/664/202108029465820664/202108029465820664.pdf. 

11 Termination Approval, RAD (Aug. 4, 2021), 

https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/452/202108040300122452/202108040300122452.pdf. 

12 See generally Compl. at 3. 

MUR792000040
MUR 7920 (Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P., et al.) 

Statement of Reasons

Page 3 of 5 

II. LEGAL ANALYSIS

A nonconnected committee is “a political committee that is not a party committee, 

an authorized committee of a candidate or a separate segregated fund established by 

a corporation or labor organization.”13 While an IEOPC is a nonconnected committee, 

it differs from traditional nonconnected committees in that it may solicit and raise 

unlimited contributions, as well as contributions from corporations and labor 

unions.14

Although IEOPCs were blessed by the courts more than a decade ago, neither the 

Act nor Commission regulations distinguish between a traditional nonconnected 

committee’s Statement of Organization and that of an IEOPC. This has long been 

noteworthy. In Advisory Opinion 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten), the Commission 

acknowledged that, “as a result of [then-]recent court decisions, the Commission may 

need to update its registration and reporting forms to account for IEOPCs.”15 It did 

not do so, instead stating that “in the meantime, [an IEOPC] may include a letter 

with its Form 1 Statement of Organization clarifying that it intends to accept 

unlimited contributions for the purpose of making independent expenditures.’”16

This temporary solution was noted on the Commission’s website, which formerly 

advised that an organization registering as an IEOPC include with its Statement of 

Organization the following language in an accompanying letter:

The committee intends to make independent expenditures, and consistent with 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision in 

SpeechNow v. FEC, it therefore intends to raise funds in unlimited amounts. This 

committee will not use those funds to make contributions, whether direct, in-kind, 

or via coordinated communications, to federal candidates or committees [the 

“SpeechNow statement”].17

It is important to note that filers were never required, merely requested, to include

such an accompanying letter. It was only on March 10, 2022—a dozen years after the 

en banc D.C. Circuit unanimously declared that an IEOPC’s activities are protected 

by the First Amendment, and well after the conduct at issue here—that the 

Commission approved revisions to Form 1 giving filers the option to register with the 

13 First Gen. Counsel’s Rpt. at 5 (citing 11 C.F.R. §§ 100.5(a), 106.6(a)).

14 See Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010); SpeechNow.org v. FEC, 599 F.3d 686 (D.C. 

Cir. 2010) (en banc); Advisory Op. 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten). 

15 First Gen. Counsel’s Rpt. at 6 (citing Advisory Opinion 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten) at 3 n.3). 

16 Id. 

17 Id. at 7.

MUR792000041
MUR 7920 (Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P., et al.) 

Statement of Reasons

Page 4 of 5 

Commission as an IEOPC.18 This was a small administrative change with no effect 

on the substantive law governing IEOPCs, but it reflected the first significant effort 

to regularize and streamline the filing process for IEOPC seeking to register with the 

Commission. 

OGC did not recount this history, and instead recommended that the Commission 

find no RTB against the Committee because the record indicates that the Committee 

intended to register as an IEOPC. OGC first points to the fact that “the source and 

amount that was contributed immediately after the Committee’s registration 

suggests a belief that the Committee was operating as an IEOPC.”19 Second, the 

Committee “engaged in none of the activities permitted for traditional nonconnected 

committees, but prohibited for IEOPCs.”20 Third, the facts that the treasurer 

contacted the Committee’s RAD analyst after receiving the Commission’s RFAI and 

filed a Form 99 the same day “support[] his assertion that the Committee was 

intended as an IEOPC.”21 Finally, OGC argues that the Commission “ha[s] no direct 

evidence calling into question the Committee’s claim that, at the time it registered, it 

intended to participate in federal elections.”22

Contrary to OGC’s analysis, however, a record indicating that the Committee 

intended to register as an IEOPC is not required. As mentioned above, registration

as an IEOPC is only requested as a matter of administrative convenience to the 

Commission; there is no regulatory provision with the force of law governing precisely 

how an IEOPC, as opposed to any other nonconnected committee, must register. 

Accordingly, if a committee engages in permissible activities for an IEOPC, namely 

by limiting itself to independent spending, it is an IEOPC regardless of whether it 

registers as one.23

As I have noted elsewhere, an IEOPC is not a new form of political committee, but

rather “simply a committee, created and regulated pursuant to FECA, that has 

chosen to exercise certain First Amendment rights acknowledged by the courts.”24

While the Commission was correct to adopt revisions to Form 1 giving filers the option 

to register with the Commission as an IEOPC, and while that option will doubtless 

18 See Commission Open Meeting (Mar. 10, 2022) (approving Agenda Document No. 22-06-A).

19 Id. 

20 Id. 

21 Id. at 7-8.

22 Id. at 8.

23 The same is true for Hybrid PACs organized to avail themselves of Carey v. FEC, 791 F. Supp. 

2d 121 (D.D.C. 2011). 

24 Statement of Reasons of Chairman Allen Dickerson, MUR 7454 (Blue Magnolia, LLC, et al) 

(April 14, 2022).

MUR792000042
MUR 7920 (Oklahomans for T.R.U.M.P., et al.) 

Statement of Reasons

Page 5 of 5 

make it easier for both filers and the Commission to undertake their respective roles 

in the reporting process, until the Commission adopts relevant regulations to the 

contrary an IEOPC is known by its actions, including its reports to this Commission, 

and not solely by its initiating paperwork.25 

*** 

For the reasons discussed above, I voted to find no RTB that the Committee 

violated 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(f) or 30118 by knowingly accepting excessive or 

prohibited contributions, and also find no RTB that Vote Safe or Init2 LLC violated 

52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(a)(1)(C) or 30118 by making excessive or prohibited 

contributions. 

June 29, 2022 

Date

___________________________ 

Allen Dickerson

Chairman

. 

25 See Commission Open Meeting (Mar. 10, 2022) (approving Agenda Document No. 22-06-A).

MUR792000043