July 2006 Federal Election Commission Volume 32, Number 7

Table of Contents

Coordinated Communications 

Final Rules

On June 8, 2006, the Commission 

published final rules and explanation 

and justification governing coordinated communications. (71 FR 

33190) The rules, which take effect 

on July 10, comply with the Court of 

Appeals ruling in Shays v. FEC that 

the Commission had not adequately 

explained one aspect of the previous 

coordinated communications regulations. 11 CFR 109.21(c)(4).

Background

The Shays court found that the 

120-day pre-election time frame 

used in the content prong of the 

three-prong coordinated communication test was not sufficiently 

justified, since there was “no support 

in the record for the specific content based standard the Commission... promulgated.” In response, 

the Commission issued a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on 

December 8, 2005, and held public hearings on January 25 and 26, 

2006. Neither the written comments 

nor the hearing testimony provided 

quantitative evidence concerning 

proposed time frames. As a result, 

the Commission licensed data from 

TNS Media Intelligence/CMAG 

regarding television advertising run 

Regulations Reports

July Reporting Reminder

Committees filing on a quarterly 

basis have a report due by July 15. 

The report covers financial activity from April 1—or the day after 

the closing date of the last report—

through June 30. Note that the July 

15 reporting deadline falls on a weekend. Filing deadlines are not extended 

when they fall on weekends.

In addition to filing quarterly reports, committees of House and Senate 

candidates active in the 2006 elections 

must file pre-election reports and may 

have to file 48-hour notices of last minute contributions of $1,000 or more. 

Political action committees (PACs) and 

party committees filing on a quarterly 

basis may also have to file pre-election 

reports and 48- or 24-hour reports of 

independent expenditures, depending 

upon the timing of their activities.

National party committees, PACs 

following a monthly schedule and 

certain state, district and local party 

committees must file a monthly report 

by July 20.1

 The report covers activ-

(continued on page 2)

(continued on page 4)

1 State, district and local party committees that have $5,000 or more of aggregate receipts and disbursements in a 

calendar year for federal election activity 

(FEA) or less than $5,000 of aggregate 

receipts and disbursements of federal 

funds in a calendar year for FEA must 

file monthly. 11 CFR 300.36(c). 

 Regulations

 1 Coordinated Communications

 Reports

 1 July Reporting Reminder

 3 Federal Register

 5 Advisory Opinions

 Statistics

 6 Congressional Campaigns Raise 

$657.2M

 7 Major Parties Raise $555.2M

 8 Nonfilers

 

 9 Alternative Dispute Resolution

 Web Site

 10 FEC Launches Treasurers Web 

Page with RSS

 10 E-mail @ FEC.gov

 11 Index

FEC Moves Toward

E-Communications

See page 10 for details
Federal Election Commission RECORD July 2006

2

by Presidential, Senate and House 

candidates during the 2004 cycle in 

effort to address the appeals court’s 

concerns. The Commission issued 

a Supplemental Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on March 15, 2006, to 

allow the public to comment on the 

licensed data. 

For more information, see the 

January 2006 Record, page 2 and the 

March 2006 Record, page 3.

Final Rules

Revised Time Frame. The Commission has retained the existing content 

prong at 11 CFR 109.21(c)(4), but 

has modified the 120-day pre-election time frame. The Commission 

has established separate time frames 

for political parties, congressional and 

presidential candidates, based on comFederal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

800/424-9530

202/694-1100

202/501-3413 (FEC Faxline)

202/219-3336 (TDD for the

 hearing impaired)

Michael E. Toner, Chairman

Robert D. Lenhard, 

 Vice Chairman

David M. Mason, Commissioner

Hans A. von Spakovsky, 

 Commissioner

Steven T. Walther, Commissioner

Ellen L. Weintraub, Commissioner

Robert J. Costa, 

 Acting Staff Director

Lawrence H. Norton, 

 General Counsel

Published by the Information

 Division

Greg J. Scott, Assistant Staff

 Director

Carlin E. Bunch, Editor

http://www.fec.gov

ments received in the rulemaking and 

the licensed data. 

• For communications that refer 

to House and Senate candidates, 

the period begins 90 days before 

each candidate’s election and runs 

through the date of that election. 

109.21(c)(4)(i). This time frame applies separately to primary and general elections. In some states these 

periods will overlap, depending on 

the timing of the primary election. 

• For communications that refer to 

Presidential candidates, the time 

frame for each state begins 120 

days before the date of its presidential primary and runs through the 

general election. 109.21(c)(4)(ii). 

• For communications coordinated 

with a political party committee 

that refer to political parties, do not 

reference a clearly identified federal 

candidate and are distributed in a jurisdiction where that party has a candidate on the ballot, the time frames 

are based on the election cycle:

 o In a non-Presidential election 

cycle, the time frame begins 90 

days before each election and 

ends on the date of that election 

(109.21(c)(4)(iii)(B));

 o In a Presidential election 

cycle, the time frame for each 

state begins 120 days before 

the date of its primary and runs 

through the general election. 

109.21(c)(4)(iii)(C).

• However, communications that 

refer only to a political party, but 

are coordinated with a candidate, 

are subject to the 90- or 120-day 

period applicable to that candidate, 

as long as they are distributed 

in that candidate’s jurisdiction. 

109.21(c)(4)(iii)(A).

• For communications that refer to 

political parties and reference a 

clearly identified federal candidate, the appropriate candidate 

time frame would apply when the 

communication is distributed in the 

candidate’s jurisdiction:

 o If the clearly identified federal 

 candidate is a House or Senate 

 candidate, the 90-day time frame 

 applies;

 o If the candidate is a Presidential candidate, the 120-

day time frame applies. 

109.21(c)(4)(iv)(A)-(B).

• For communications coordinated 

with a political party committee 

that refer to both a political party 

and a clearly identified federal 

candidate and are distributed 

outside the candidate’s jurisdiction, 

the election-cycle rules for communications referring to political 

parties described above apply. 

109.21(c)(4)(iv)(C).

The Commission has also clarified that a public communication 

satisfies the content standards at 

109.21 (c)(4)(i) or (ii) with respect 

to a candidate only if it is publicly 

distributed or otherwise publicly disseminated during the relevant time 

periods before an election in which 

that candidate or another candidate 

seeking election to the same office is 

on the ballot. 

“Directed to Voters.” The Commission has removed the phrase 

“directed to voters in the jurisdiction” from former 109.21(c)(4)(iii). 

The revised rule states that a public 

communication must be “publicly 

distributed or otherwise publicly 

disseminated in the clearly identified candidate’s jurisdiction” or if 

the public communication refers to 

a political party, but not to a clearly 

identified federal candidate, in a 

jurisdiction in which one or more 

candidates of a political party appear 

on the ballot. The Commission has 

decided not to specify a minimum 

number of persons that must be able 

to receive a communication for the 

fourth content standard to apply.

Common Vendor and Former Employee Conduct Standard. BCRA 

requires that the Commission address “the use of a common vendor” 

and “persons who previously served 

as an employee of a candidate of 

a political party” in the context of 

Regulations

(continued from page 1)
July 2006 Federal Election Commission RECORD

3

coordination. The Commission has 

decided to revise the temporal limit 

in the common vendor and former 

employee conduct standards to 

encompass 120 days rather than the 

entire current election cycle. The 

120-day period starts on the last 

day of the individual’s employment with a candidate or political 

party committee or on the last day 

that a commercial vendor performed any of the services listed in 

109.21(d)(4)(ii) for a candidate or 

political party committee.

Endorsements and Solicitations. 

The Commission has created a new 

safe harbor in 109.21 for endorsements by federal candidates of other 

federal and nonfederal candidates. 

The Commission has also created 

a safe harbor for solicitations by 

federal candidates for other federal 

and nonfederal candidates, political 

committees and certain tax-exempt 

501(c) organizations as permitted 

by 11 CFR 300.65. Such endorsements or solicitations are not coordinated communications unless the 

communication promotes, attacks, 

supports or opposes (PASOs) the 

endorsing or soliciting candidate 

or another candidate who seeks 

election to the same office as the 

endorsing or soliciting candidate. 

This safe harbor applies no matter 

when the endorsement or solicitation occurs.

This safe harbor was not extended to state ballot initiatives.

Publicly Available Information. 

The Commission has created a safe 

harbor for use of publicly available 

information in creating, producing 

or distributing a communication. 

Such use would not, in and of itself, 

satisfy any of the conduct standards 

in 109.21(d). This safe harbor 

would apply to four of the five conduct standards; only the “request 

or suggestion” conduct standard in 

109.21(d)(1) is excluded from the 

safe harbor. 

To qualify for this safe harbor, 

the person paying for the communication must demonstrate that the 

information used in creating, producing or distributing the communication was obtained from a publicly 

available source. A communication 

that does not fall within this safe 

harbor will not automatically be 

presumed to satisfy the conduct 

prong of the coordinated communication test.

Establishment and Use of a 

Firewall. The Commission has 

created a safe harbor from the conduct standards when a commercial 

vendor, former employee or political committee establishes and uses 

a firewall to prevent the sharing of 

information about the candidate 

or political party’s plans, projects, 

activities or needs. To qualify for 

the safe harbor, the firewall must be 

described in a written policy that is 

distributed to all relevant employees, consultants and clients affected 

by the policy. It must also be designed and implemented to prohibit 

the flow of information between: 

• Employees or consultants providing services for the person paying 

for the communication; and 

• Those currently or previously 

providing services to the candidate, the authorized committee, 

the candidate’s opponent, the 

opponent’s authorized committee 

or a political party committee.

This provision does not dictate 

specific procedures required to 

prevent the flow of information, 

since a firewall is more effective 

if established and implemented by 

each entity based on its specific 

organization, clients and personnel. However, a good example of 

an acceptable firewall is described 

in MUR 5506 (EMILY’s List), First 

General Counsel’s Report at 6-7. 

Additionally, the Commission does 

not require firewalls and will not 

draw a negative inference from the 

lack of such a screening policy.

Payment Prong Amendment. The 

new regulations clarify that the payment prong is satisfied if the communication “is paid, in whole or 

in part, by a person other than that 

candidate, authorized committee, or 

political party committee.”

Party Coordinated Communications (11 CFR 109.37). The 

Commission revised its regulations 

regarding party coordinated communication to ensure consistency 

with the revisions in the fourth 

content standard at 109.21(c)(4). 

These regulations apply to communications paid for by party committees and are similar to the standards 

for coordinated communications. 

The new regulations replace the old 

120-day time frame with the new 

90- and 120-day periods applicable 

to communications that refer to 

House and Senate candidates or 

Presidential candidates, respectively.

Revised 109.37 does not contain 

separate rules for communications that refer to political parties, 

because the content standard in 

109.37(a) is not satisfied by communications that reference only 

political parties, unlike revised 

109.21,

“Agent” Clarification. The 

Commission has added a sentence 

to 109.20(a) to explain that any 

reference in the coordinated communication rules to a candidate, a 

candidate’s authorized committee 

or a political party committee, also 

refers to any their agents.

 —Carlin E. Bunch

Federal Register

Federal Register notices are 

available from the FEC’s Public 

Records Office, on the web 

site at www.fec.gov/law/law_

rulemakings.shtml and from the 

FEC Faxline, 202/501-3413.

Notice 2006-10

Coordinated Communications (71 

FR 33190, June 8, 2006)
Federal Election Commission RECORD July 2006

4

ity for the month of June. Also, these 

committees may have to file 48- or 

24-hour reports of independent 

expenditures, depending upon the 

timing of their activities.

Electronic Filing Software

The Commission recently updated 

its electronic filing format to Version 

5.3.1.0. Before filing their next report, FECFile users must download 

version 5.3 of the software from the 

FEC web site at www.fec.gov/elecfil/FECFileIntroPage.shtml. 

Committees using commercial 

software should contact their vendors for more information about the 

latest software release. Only reports 

filed in the new format version will 

be accepted.

Filing Electronically

Under the Commission’s mandatory electronic filing regulations, 

individuals and organizations2

that receive contributions or make 

expenditures in excess of $50,000 

in a calendar year—or have reason 

to expect to do so—must file all 

reports and statements with the FEC 

electronically. Electronic filers who 

instead file on paper or submit an 

electronic report that does not pass 

the Commission’s validation program will be considered nonfilers 

and may be subject to enforcement 

actions, including administrative 

fines. 

Senate committees and other 

committees that file with the Secretary of the Senate are not subject to 

the mandatory electronic filing rules, 

but may file an unofficial electronic 

Reports

(continued from page 1)

copy of their reports with the Commission in order to speed disclosure.

Timely Filing for Paper Filers

Reports sent by registered or 

certified mail, by Express or Priority Mail with delivery confirmation 

or by overnight mail with an online 

tracking system must be postmarked, 

or deposited with the mailing 

service, by the filing deadline. A 

committee sending its reports by 

certified mail should keep its mailing 

receipt with the postmark as proof 

of filing because the U.S. Postal 

Service does not keep complete records of items sent by certified mail. 

A committee sending its reports by 

registered, Express or Priority mail, 

or by an overnight delivery service, 

should also keep its proof of mailing 

or other means of transmittal of its 

reports.

Reports sent by other means—including first class mail and courier—must be received by the FEC 

before it closes its doors on the filing 

deadline. 2 U.S.C. §434(a)(5) and 11 

CFR 104.5(e).

For those filers who are not 

required to file their reports electronically, paper forms are available 

on the FEC’s web site, www.fec.

gov/info/forms.shtml, and from FEC 

Faxline, the agency’s automated fax 

system, 202/501-3413.

Additional Information

For more information on 2006 

reporting dates:

• See the reporting tables in the 

January 2006 Record;

• Call and request the reporting 

tables from the FEC at 800/424-

9530 or 202/694-1100;

• Fax the reporting tables to yourself using the FEC’s Faxline at 

202/501-3413, document 586; or

• Visit the FEC’s web site at www.

fec.gov/info/report_dates.shtml to 

view the reporting tables online.

 —Elizabeth Kurland

2 The regulation covers individuals and 

organizations required to file reports 

with the Commission, including any person making an independent expenditure. 

Disbursements made by individuals or 

unregistered entities for electioneering 

communications do not count toward the 

$50,000 threshold for mandatory electronic filing. See 11 CFR 104.18(a).

Enforcement Query 

System Available on 

FEC Web Site

 The FEC continues to update 

and expand its Enforcement 

Query System (EQS), a webbased search tool that allows 

users to find and examine public 

documents regarding closed 

Commission enforcement matters. 

Using current scanning, optical 

character recognition and text 

search technologies, the system 

permits intuitive and flexible 

searches of case documents and 

other materials. 

 Users of the system can search 

for specific words or phrases 

from the text of all public case 

documents. They can also 

identify single matters under 

review (MURs) or groups of 

cases by searching additional 

identifying information about 

cases prepared as part of the 

Case Management System. 

Included among these criteria 

are case names and numbers, 

complainants and respondents, 

timeframes, dispositions, legal 

issues and penalty amounts. The 

Enforcement Query System may 

be accessed on the Commission’s 

web site at www.fec.gov.

 Currently, the EQS contains 

complete public case files for all 

MURs closed since January 1, 

1999. In addition to adding all 

cases closed subsequently, staff is 

working to add cases closed prior 

to 1999. Within the past year, 

Alternative Dispute Resolution 

(ADR) cases were added to the 

system. All cases closed since the 

ADR program’s October 2000 

inception can be accessed through 

the system.
July 2006 Federal Election Commission RECORD

5

Advisory

Opinions

Advisory Opinion 2006-15: 

Domestic Subsidiaries of 

Foreign Corporation May 

Donate to State and Local 

Elections

Wholly-owned domestic subsidiaries of a foreign corporation may 

donate funds in connection with 

state and local elections, subject to 

state law, as long as no foreign national participates in decision-making and the funds do not come from 

a foreign national.

Background

Foreign nationals cannot directly 

or indirectly make a contribution or 

donation of money in connection 

with a federal, state or local election, 

nor can they direct, dictate, control 

or directly or indirectly participate in 

decisions concerning the making of 

any such contributions or donations. 

2 U.S.C. 441e and 11 CFR 110.20. 

The Act and Commission regulations define “foreign national” to 

include “foreign principals” and 

individuals who are neither U.S. 

citizens nor lawfully admitted 

permanent residents (i.e., green card 

holders). 2 U.S.C. 441e(b) and 11 

CFR 110.20(a)(3). A foreign principal includes corporations organized 

under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign 

country. 22 U.S.C. 611(b)(3).

TransCanada Corporation is a 

Canadian company that owns two 

U.S. corporations: Gas Transmission 

Northwest Corporation (GTN) and 

TransCanada Hydro Northeast Inc. 

(TC Hydro). Each wholly-owned 

subsidiary has a three member Board 

of Directors, and each Board has one 

member who is neither a U.S. citizen 

nor a green card holder. GTN and 

TC Hydro would like to donate and 

disburse corporate treasury funds 

in connection with state and local 

elections.

Analysis

Under the Act, TransCanada 

Corporation is a foreign national. 

However, because GTN and TC 

Hydro are each incorporated in 

the United States and each has 

its principal place of business in 

the United States, they are not 

foreign nationals for the purposes 

of 2 U.S.C. 441e. Because one 

director on each of the subsidiaries’ boards is not a U.S. citizen or 

a permanent resident, those two 

individuals are considered foreign 

nationals.

Because donations or disbursements may not be derived from the 

foreign national’s funds GTN and 

TC Hydro must use a reasonable 

accounting method to show that 

the subsidiary has sufficient funds 

in its accounts, other than funds 

given or loaned by its foreign 

national parent corporation. See 

AO 1992-16. 

GTN and TC Hydro have 

proposed arrangements similar to 

those approved by the Commission 

in AO 2000-17 to ensure that no 

foreign national has any decisionmaking authority concerning the 

making of donations or disbursements. The subsidiaries’ Boards 

of Directors would establish a 

political donation budget on a “not 

to exceed” basis. The directors 

would enforce this budget cap and 

delegate political donation decision-making to a subset of board 

members composed entirely of 

U.S. citizens or permanent residents. 

This approach ensures that only 

funds raised by the U.S. corporations are used and that only citizens or permanent residents have 

decision-making power for the 

state and local political donations 

and disbursements in question. As 

such, the plan is permissible under 

the Act and FEC regulations.

Length: 6 pages

Date: May 19, 2006

 —Carlin E. Bunch

Advisory Opinion 2006-19: 

Local Party Communications 

Not FEA

A local party committee’s mass 

mailing and pre-recorded, electronically dialed telephone calls to the 

party’s registered voters do not 

constitute get-out-the-vote activity 

(GOTV) or federal election activity 

(FEA), because they promote only 

nonfederal candidates, will not be 

made in close proximity to the date 

of the election, are insufficiently 

targeted and are not individualized. 

As a result, the party may pay for 

the communications entirely with 

nonfederal funds.

Background

The Los Angeles County Democratic Party Central Committee 

(LACDP) proposes to make prerecorded, electronically dialed 

telephone calls and send direct 

mail to voters in the City of Long 

Beach urging them to vote for local 

candidates. These communications 

indicate the date of the election. The 

election for local candidates occurs 

on same day as a federal primary 

election in the state, but the party’s 

communications will not mention 

any federal candidates.

The Act and Commission regulations identify certain activities 

conducted by state, district and 

local parties as FEA, regardless of 

whether the party is registered with 

the FEC. These activities must be 

paid for with either federal funds 

or a combination of federal and 

Levin funds. 2 U.S.C. 431(20) and 

441i(b)(1).1 One type of FEA is 

voter identification, GOTV and generic campaign activity conducted in 

1

 Federal funds are subject to the 

amount limitations, source prohibitions 

and reporting requirements of the Act. 

Levin funds are raised by state, district 

and local party committees pursuant to 

the restrictions in 11 CFR 300.31 and 

disbursed subject to the restrictions in 

11 CFR 300.32. 

(continued on page 6)
Federal Election Commission RECORD July 2006

6

Advisory Opinions

(continued from page 5)

Advisory Opinion Requests

AOR 2006-18

Using campaign’s web site and 

e-mail list to promote sales of 

candidate’s book (Congresswoman 

Kay Granger and the Kay Granger 

Campaign Fund, May 3, 2006)

Congressional Campaigns 

Raise $657.2M

From January 1, 2005 to March 

31, 2006, congressional campaigns 

have raised $657.2 million, 13 percent more than the last comparable 

cycle. Spending remained nearly 

unchanged from last cycle—$330.4 

million. Cash-on-hand was up 24 

percent to of $522.3 million.

Senate campaigns reported 

$265.1 million in receipts, $110.9 

million in disbursements and 

cash balances of $202.5 million, 

which is a five percent increase in 

fundraising, a 21 percent decline in 

spending and a 22 percent increase 

in cash-on-hand. It is difficult to 

compare Senate races across different election cycles because of 

differences in the size and level of 

competition in states, variations in 

retirement of certain Senators and 

other unique factors. 

House campaigns raised $392.1 

million, spent $219.5 million and 

reported cash balances of $319.9 

million, which is an increase of 

19 percent in fundraising and 15 

percent increase in spending. Receipts by Democratic House candidates increased 25 percent with 

large increases for challengers and 

open seat candidates. Republican 

House candidates’ receipts were 

six percent higher than in the last 

cycle with the increase confined to 

incumbent candidates.

Contributions from individuals, 

totaling $414.9 million, continue 

to be the largest source of receipts 

for Congressional candidates 

Statistics

AOR 2006-20

Nascent political party’s ability 

to incorporate for liability purposes 

and to raise and spend funds without 

such funds being considered contributions or expenditures triggering 

registration as a political committee 

(Unity 08, May 30, 2006)

Commission 

Calendar Always 

Up-to-Date 

 Between issues of the Record, 

you can stay up-to-date on the 

latest FEC activity by visiting 

the Commission Calendar on 

our web site at http://www.fec.

gov/Fec_calendar/maincal.cfm. 

The Calendar lists Commission 

meetings, reporting deadlines, 

conferences and outreach events, 

advisory opinion and rulemaking 

comment periods and other useful 

information. Each calendar entry 

links directly to the relevant 

documents, so you can quickly 

access detailed information on the 

subjects that interest you. 

 While you’re visiting www.fec.

gov, be sure to explore the rest 

of our site to review the latest 

campaign finance reports and 

data, research enforcement actions 

and litigation, read press releases 

and get help complying with the 

law. Visit today and add our site to 

your favorites.

connection with an election in which 

a candidate for federal office appears 

on the ballot. GOTV activity is defined as contacting registered voters 

by telephone, in person or by other 

individualized means to assist them 

in engaging in the act of voting. 11 

CFR 100.24(a)(3). GOTV includes, 

but is not limited to: 

• Providing individual voters information such as the date of the 

election, the times when polling 

places are open and the location of 

particular polling places; and

• Offering to transport or actually 

transporting voters to the polls.

Analysis

LACPD’s proposed communications promote the election of only 

nonfederal candidates. Additionally, the party would distribute the 

communications four or more days 

prior to the election, so they are less 

effective in motivating recipients to 

go to the polls. This is more likely 

to be “mere encouragement” to vote 

and regulating them is unnecessary 

and could adversely affect grassroots 

political activities.

Moreover, LACDP would not 

target the communications at any 

specific subset of Democratic voters. The direct mail piece is merely 

a form letter and the pre-recorded 

telephone calls are the functional 

equivalent. Additionally, while the 

communications do mention the 

election date, they do not include 

additional information such as the 

hours and location of the individual 

voter’s polling place. Given these 

facts, the communications do not 

provide individualized assistance 

to voters, and thus fall outside the 

definitions of GOTV and FEA. As 

a result, the communications may 

be paid for entirely with nonfederal 

funds.

Concurring Opinion

Commissioner Hans A. von Spakovsky issued a concurring opinion 

on June 5, 2006.

Date: June 5, 2004

Length: 6 pages

 —Carlin E. Bunch
July 2006 Federal Election Commission RECORD

7

representing 63 percent of all 

fundraising. PAC contributions totaled $172.1 million or 26 percent 

of Congressional receipts, while 

candidates themselves contributed 

or loaned a total of $49.7 million—eight percent of all receipts.

Further Information

For more information on Congressional statistics, please see the 

May 11, 2006 press release entitled 

“Congressional Fundraising Continues to Grow” on the FEC web 

site, www.fec.gov. The release 

includes extensive statistics, such 

as:

• Summary data for Senate and 

House candidates by political 

party, as well as by candidate 

status: incumbent, challenger or 

open seat;

• Rankings of Senate and House 

candidates for the following 

categories: receipts, individual 

contributions, PAC and other 

committee contributions, disbursements, cash-on-hand and 

debts owed;

• Six-year financial summaries of 

Senate candidates for 2006; and

• Current cycle financial summaries for each House campaign.

 —Carlin E. Bunch

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

Receipts Disbursements Cash-on-Hand

91-92 93-94 95-96 97-98 99-01 01-02 03-04 05-06

Congressional Financial Activity, 1989-2006

In Millions

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

Receipts Disbursements Cash-on-Hand

91-92 93-94 95-96 97-98 99-00 01-02 03-04 05-06

Democratic National, Senatorial, Congressional

& State/Local Party Committee Totals

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

Receipts Disbursements Cash-on-Hand

91-92 93-94 95-96 97-98 99-00 01-02 03-04 05-06

Republican National, Senatorial, Congressional

& State/Local Party Committee Totals

In Millions

In Millions

Major Parties Raise

$555.2M

The Democratic and Republican Parties have reported raising 

$555.2 million in hard money at 

the national, state and local levels 

during the first 15 months of the 

2006 election cycle—five percent more than they raised during a comparable period in 2004. 

Fundraising from federal sources 

was only one percent lower than 

total fundraising during the same 

period in 2002, even though soft 

money was permitted in that cycle.

The 2006 election cycle is the 

second in which national parties 

(continued on page 8)
Federal Election Commission RECORD July 2006

8

Committees Fail to File PreElection Reports

Several committees failed to file 

12-Day Pre-Primary reports for primary elections in their states:

• Shawn O’Donnell for Congress—

May 13 primary election in Virginia

• Matt Wertz for Congress—May 16 

primary election in Pennsylvania

• Pennacchio for Pennsylvania—

May 16 primary election in Pennsylvania

• Ned Lamont for Senate—May 20 

Connecticut Convention

• Roberto Rodriguez for Congress—

June 6 primary election in California

• Orren for Congress—June 6 primary election in California

• Todd Chretien for Senate 2006—

June 6 primary election in California

• Mountjoy for U.S. Senate—June 6 

primary election in California

FEC Web Site Offers Nonfilers

Podcasts

In an effort to provide more 

information to the regulated 

community and the public, the 

Commission is making its open 

meetings and public hearings 

available as audio recordings 

through the FEC web site, as well 

as by podcasts. The audio files, 

and directions on how to subscribe 

to the podcasts are available 

under Audio Recordings through 

the Commission Meetings tab at 

http://www.fec.gov. 

The audio files are divided into 

tracks corresponding to each 

portion of the agenda for ease 

of use. To listen to the open 

meeting without subscribing to 

the podcasts, click the icon next to 

each agenda item. Although the 

service is free, anyone interested 

in listening to podcasts must 

download the appropriate software 

listed on the web site. Podcast 

subscribers will automatically 

receive the files as soon as they 

become available–typically a day 

or two after the meeting. 

2004. Federal fundraising by 

parties has often been stable or 

even declined slightly in cycles 

without a Presidential campaign. 

While Democrats closed the gap 

in fundraising with their Republican counterparts, Republican 

Party committees still raised 

nearly $112 million more than 

Democrats. Contributions from 

individuals continue to be the largest source of funds for all party 

committees, representing more 

than 78 percent of all Democratic 

party funds and 89 percent of Republican fundraising. One of the 

changes included in the Bipartisan 

Campaign Reform Act of 2002 

was an increase in contribution 

limits for individuals giving to 

national party committees. The 

limit changed from $20,000 per 

year prior to passage of BCRA to 

$25,000 in 2003-2004 and $26,700 

in 2005-2006, due to indexing for 

inflation. 

Contributions from PACs, 

whose limits were not changed by 

BCRA, accounted for ten percent 

of overall Democratic receipts and 

six percent for Republicans. 

Transfers to party committees 

from the campaigns of individual 

members of Congress have played 

an increasing role in party finance 

during recent cycles. Nearly 20 

percent of funds raised by the 

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee came directly 

from Democratic House members’ 

campaigns. Republican members 

accounted for six percent of National Republican Congressional 

Committee funds. 

Further Information

For more information on party 

committee statistics, please see 

the May 17, 2006 Press Release 

entitled “Party Financial Activity Summarized” on the FEC web 

site, www.fec.gov. This release 

includes extensive statistics such 

as:

Statistics

(continued from page 7)

have been prohibited from receiving soft money—funds from 

sources or in amounts not permitted in federal elections. The 

accompanying table shows hard 

money fundraising by national 

party committees from January 

1, 2005 through March 31, 2006 

compared with both hard and soft 

money receipts from previous 

cycles. 

During this period, Democratic Party committees reported 

raising $221.7 million—an increase of 23 percent over the 

same period in 2004. Republican 

Party committees raised $333.4 

million—four percent less than 

• Democratic Party Committee Financial Activity; 

• Republican Party Committee 

Financial Activity; 

• National Party Contributions 

from Individuals by Size; 

• Senatorial Campaign Committee 

Contributions from Individuals 

by Size;

• Congressional Campaign Committee Contributions from Individuals by Size; 

• Campaign Committee Transfers 

to Party Congressional Committees;

• Joint-Fundraising and Campaign 

Committee Transfers to Party 

Senate Committees; and

• National Party Transfers to 

States. 

 —Carlin E. Bunch
July 2006 Federal Election Commission RECORD

9

Alternative 

Dispute 

Resolution

ADR Program Update

The Commission recently resolved six additional cases under 

the Alternative Dispute Resolution 

(ADR) program. The respondents, 

the alleged violations of the Federal 

Election Campaign Act (the Act) 

and final disposition of the cases are 

listed below.

1. The Commission dismissed 

the matter of Dollars for Democrats, 

Ann Fishman, treasurer, regarding failure to report receipts. The 

respondents acknowledged that the 

receipts were not included in their 

original 2004 12-Day Pre-General 

Election report. Once they discovered the error, they amended the 

report to disclose the additional receipts. They explained that they did 

not make contributions or expenditures on behalf of federal candidates 

during the reporting period. Since 

the committee made no contributions 

or expenditures during the reporting 

period, they were not required to 

file the 12-Day Pre-General Report. 

Unlike quarterly or monthly reports, 

which must be filed regardless of 

activity, pre-election reports are required only if the committee makes 

contributions or expenditures in 

connection with the election during 

the applicable period. In this case, 

since the committee chose to file the 

report, it would have been preferable 

if they had included the receipts. 

(ADR 278*)

2. The Commission reached an 

agreement with the Idaho Republican Party, Andrew Fales, treasurer, 

regarding failure to provide accurate 

contributor information and failure 

to employ best efforts to obtain such 

information. The respondents contended that committee staff turnover, 

irregular employment of professional staff to assist the committee and 

the lack of appropriate records led to 

the violations. Since the violations 

were brought to the committee’s attention, the committee has hired professional staff and implemented new 

procedures to ensure that records 

are maintained and that follow-up 

letters are sent when information is 

missing. The respondents agreed 

to establish new internal operating 

procedures, contact the contributors 

to obtain the required employment 

and occupation information that was 

missing from the 2002 election cycle, file amended reports disclosing 

such information and pay a $10,000 

civil penalty. (ADR 284*)

3. The Commission reached an 

agreement with MOVEON.ORG Political Action, Wes Boyd, treasurer, 

regarding failure to forward earmarked contributions within 10 days 

after initial receipt. The respondents 

acknowledged the need to establish a back-up procedure to handle 

disbursements of earmarked contributions in the event that committee 

personnel are unavailable to do so in 

a timely manner. Respondents have 

contracted a professional accounting 

firm and agreed to maintain the new 

back-up procedures, attend an FEC 

seminar and to pay a $2,000 civil 

penalty. (ADR 290*)

4. The Commission has reached 

an agreement with Pennsylvania 

Medical Society Political Action 

Committee Federal, Larry Light, 

treasurer, regarding inaccurate 

reporting of receipts and disbursements. The respondents acknowledge inadvertent errors in disclosing 

the Committee’s financial activity 

on the 2003 Year-end report. They 

state that the errors occurred during the transfer of data to FECFile. 

The committee filed an amended 

report to disclose additional receipts 

and disbursements. They agreed to 

establish new procedures to provide 

for regular pre-filing review of all 

FEC reports, maintain a guidebook 

on compliance with the requirements of the Act, send two members 

to attend an FEC seminar and pay a 

$9,000 civil penalty. (ADR 294*)

5. The Commission has reached 

an agreement with Progressive 

Majority, Thomas C. Matzzie, treasurer, regarding failure to accurately 

disclose receipts and disbursements. 

The respondents explained that the 

omissions from the committee’s 

2004 30-Day Post General Report 

were inadvertent. They have amended their reports and have agreed to 

proceed with their request to terminate the committee and pay a $4,500 

civil penalty. (ADR 288*)

6. The Commission has reached 

an agreement with W.R. Timken, Jr. 

regarding his excessive contributions 

during 2001. Mr. Timken discovered he had exceeded the $25,000 

annual aggregate limit on individual 

contributions allowable at the time. 

He sought and obtained refunds of 

excessive contributions and agreed 

to disgorge and forward $6,999 to 

the U.S. Treasury. (ADR 292)

 —Carlin E. Bunch

*This case was internally generated. 

• Bill Bowlin for Senate Committee—June 6 primary election in 

Mississippi

• Allen W. McColloch, MD for US 

Senate—June 6 primary election in 

New Mexico

Prior to the reporting deadline, 

the Commission notified the committees of their filing obligations. 

Committees that failed to file the 

required reports were subsequently 

notified that their reports had not 

been received and that their names 

would be published if they did not 

respond within four business days. 

The Federal Election Campaign 

Act requires the Commission to publish the names of principal campaign 

committees if they fail to file 12 day 

pre-election reports or the quarterly 

report due before the candidate’s 

election. 2 U.S.C. 437g(b). The 

agency may also pursue enforcement 

actions against nonfilers and late filers on a case-by-case basis.
Federal Election Commission RECORD July 2006

10

Web Site

FEC Launches Treasurers’ 

Web Page with RSS

The Commission invites you to 

visit its new “Resources for Committee Treasurers” web page and 

to subscribe to its new “Tips for 

Treasurers” RSS syndication service. 

You’ll find the new page at www.fec.

gov/info/TipsforTreasurers.shtml.

Designed to help treasurers get 

the information they need to comply 

with the federal campaign finance 

laws, the new web page provides 

links to an array of helpful publications, online presentations and other 

resources. The web page also offers 

timely tips and reminders to help 

treasurers meet their obligations 

under the law. As an added feature, 

visitors can subscribe to receive 

automatic notification of updates 

to this page via RSS syndication 

service. This service uses a technology called XML to deliver the very 

latest information directly to your 

desktop or web browser. Please visit 

our RSS information page at www.

fec.gov/rss/RSSFeeds.shtml to learn 

more.

If you have any questions, would 

like to provide feedback or have 

compliance tips of your own to 

offer, please send us an e-mail at 

info@fec.gov. 

All political committees should provide a current email 

address on their Statement of Organization (FEC Form 1), 

and committees that file electronically must provide one. It’s 

important to keep all contact information on the Statement 

of Organization up-to-date, because the FEC uses it 

to send committees important compliance information. 

As the agency begins to communicate with committees 

electronically, keeping the committee’s e-mail address 

current will be even more important. E-mail communication 

will allow the agency to provide more timely and tailored 

information to committees, in addition to saving tax dollars. 

Watch for more information about this exciting new program 

and be sure to keep your committee’s email address current 

on your Form 1. The form is available from the Commission 

or on its web site at www.fec.gov/info/forms.shtml

A message from the FEC Information Division

www.fec.gov / 800-424-9530 / info@fec.gov

E-mail @ FEC.gov

The FEC is testing an e-mail 

distribution system that will enable the agency to replace paper 

correspondence with electronic 

communications. E-mail communications will not only be 

more timely and convenient for 

recipients, they also will save tax 

dollars.

All political committees should 

to provide a current e-mail address 

on their Statement of Organization 

(FEC Form 1), and committees 

that file electronically must provide one. 11 CFR 102.2(a)(1)(vii). 

The contact information on the 

Statement of Organization is used 

for most official correspondence 

correct address?

Do we have your @

Please make 

sure your 

current e-mail 

address 

appears on 

FEC Form 1.

from the Commission. As the 

agency begins communicating 

with committees electronically, 

keeping the committee’s e-mail 

address current is even more 

important. To update your committee’s e-mail address or other 

contact information, the treasurer 

must file an amended Form 1. 

Electronic filers must submit the 

amendment electronically. Paper 

filers may download the form 

from the FEC web site, www.fec.

gov/info/forms.shtml.

Watch for more information 

about this exciting new program in 

the months ahead, and be sure to 

keep your committee’s Statement 

of Organization up-to-date.

The Commission will distribute this flier to encourage committees to update their email addresses in prepartion for the FEC’s new e-mail distribution system.
July 2006 Federal Election Commission RECORD

11

The first number in each citation refers to the numeric month of 

the 2006 Record issue in which the 

article appeared. The second number, following the colon, indicates 

the page number in that issue. For 

example, “1:4” means that the article 

is in the January issue on page four.

Index

Advisory Opinions

2005-16: Press Exemption Applied 

to Web Sites, 1:11

2005-18: Candidate May Host Radio 

Program, 1:12

2005-19: Radio Program Qualifies 

for Press Exemption, 2:3

2005-20: Payroll Deduction for LLP 

PAC, 3:8

2006-1: Committee May Accept 

Discount in Normal Course of 

Business, 4:4

2006-2: LLC Does Not Qualify as 

Membership Organization, 4:4

2006-3: Common Username and 

Password Acceptable for SSF Web 

Site, 5:6

2006-4: Candidate Contributions to 

Ballot Initiative Committee, 5:6

2006-6: Millionaires’ Amendment 

Applied to California Special 

Election, 4:5

2006-7: Committee May Promote 

Candidate’s Book on Web Site, 

6:4

2006-8: Corporation Collecting and 

Forwarding Contributions from 

Individuals to Political Committees, 6:4

2006-9, 6:5

2006-11: Allocation of Payment for 

Mass Mailings, 6:5

2006-12: Labor Organization Affiliation During Merger, 6:6

2006-13: Candidate’s Compensation 

According to Firm’s Plan is not a 

Contribution, 6:7

2006-15: Domestic Subsidiaries of 

Foreign Corporation May Donate 

to State and Local Elections, 7:5

2006-16: Misappropriated Funds, 

6:8

2006-19: Local Party Communications Not FEA, 7:5

Compliance

Administrative Fine Program Extended, 1:15

Administrative Fine Update, 5:9

Alternative Dispute Resolution Update, 1:15, 2:7, 3:9, 5:10, 7:9

MURs 5305 & 5398: Corporate and 

Excessive Contributions in the 

Name of Another, 5:8

MUR 5388: Accepting Excessive 

Contributions, 6:2

MUR 5390: Chartered Corporation 

Pays Record $3.8M Civil Penalty, 

6:1

MUR 5453: Excessive and Prohibited Contributions, 4:8

MUR 5628: Contributions in the 

Name of Another, 1:14

MUR 5635: No-Risk Contract Results in Corporate Contributions, 

2:6

Nonfilers, 7:8

Sharpton Repayment Agreement, 2:6

Correction

2006 Coordinated Party Expenditures, 4:11

Reports Due in 2006, 2:10

Court Cases

____ v. FEC

– CCL, 5:7, 6:3

– CREW, 1:13

– EMILY’s List, 2:5

–LaRouche, 4:7

– Liffrig v. FEC, 2:5

– Kean for Congress, 3:7

–Shays II, 6:1

– Wisconsin Right to Life, 3:1 

FEC v. ____

– Kalogianis, 3:8

– Reform Party, 1:13

Information

IRS Report on Political Activity 

Compliance by Exempt Organizations, 4:9

Party Activities

2006 Coordinated Party Expenditure 

Limits, 3:5

Regulations

Coordinated Communications 

NPRM, 1:2; final rules, 7:1

Electioneering Communications, 

final rules, 2:1

FEA final rules, 3:2

FEA interim final rule, 5:3

Internet final rules, 5:1

Petition for Rulemaking, EC Exemption, 4:2

Public Hearing on Coordinated 

Communications, 3:3

Revised E&J for “Agent,” 3:1

Solicit and Direct, final rules, 4:1

State, District and Local Party Committee Wages, final rules, 1: 3

Reports

Alabama Primary Runoff Delayed, 

6:9

April Quarterly Reporting Reminder, 

4:1

California Special Election Reporting: 50th District, 2:4

Connecticut Convention Reporting 

Dates, 6:9

Due in 2006, 1:4, 2:10

FECFile Update, 3:11

FEC Form Instructions Revised, 6:9

July Reporting Reminder, 7:1

Statistics

Congressional Campaigns Raise 

$657.2M, 7:6

Major Parties Raise $555.2M, 7:7

PACs Raise $477.4M in 2005, 4:7

Party Committees Raise Over $430 

Million, 5:10

Senate Fundraising Figures, 2:8

Web Site

Administrative Fines Calculator, 

2:10

Commission Calendar Always UpTo-Date, 1:18

E&J Compilation Now Available on 

FEC Web Site, 4:10

E-mail @ FEC.gov, 7:10

FEC Web Site Presents Podcasts, 2:9

FEC Launches Treasurers’ Web 

Page with RSS, 7:10

New Search Engine for FEC Web 

Site, 4:10
Federal Election Commission RECORD July 2006

PRESORTED STANDARD

U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

999 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20463

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300