HOLTZMANVOGE L PLLC 

\//fi/7lt'Y.< ill 45 Noiih HiU Diivc 

Slute 100 

W.nnenton. V.A:0186 

p/540-341-SSOS 

t/540-341-8509 

Febmary 15, 2012 

Commission Secretary 

Federal Election Commission 

999 E Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20463 

Re: Request For Consideration of Legal Question by Commission Pursuant to 

Notice 2011-11 

Dear Commission Secretary, 

The following request for consideration of a legal question by the Commission is 

submitted by the undersigned counsel on behalf of Michael Williams For U.S. Senate Committee 

(the "Committee"),' pursuant to the Commission's Policy Statement designated as Notice 2011-

11. 

On Febmary 9, 2012, Ms. Nataliya loffe of the Reports Analysis Division contacted 

Thomas J. Josefiak, and notified him that RAD was not fully satisfied with a written response 

submitted on behalf of the Committee in connection with a RFAI. For purposes of Notice 2011 -

11, we believe this date, Febmary 9, constitutes the triggering notification to the Committee of a 

"determination by the Reports Analysis Division ... that a person or entity remains obligated to 

take corrective action to resolve an issue that has arisen during the report review ... process." 

Notice 2011 -11, Policy Statement Regarding a Program for Requesting Consideration of Legal 

Questions by the Commission, 76 Fed. Reg. 45,798 (Aug. 1, 2011). This request is therefore 

submitted within the required 15-day time frame. 

Legal Question Presented 

This request relates to the proper disposition of funds raised and spent in connection with 

an anticipated special election that did not ultimately occur. 

Michael Williams For U.S. Senate Committee changed its name to Michael Williams For Congress in June 2011. 

Attachment 1, Page 1 of 14 
Specifically, when a candidate raises funds for an anticipated special election that 

subsequently does not occur, must all funds raised in connection with that election be 

refunded or redesignated in writing, or is the candidate permitted to spend some or all of 

those funds in connection with the anticipated special election? 

Factual Background 

Michael Williams filed FEC Form 2 (Statement of Candidacy) on December 16, 2008, 

indicating his intention to mn for U.S. Senate in Texas in 2010. Michael Williams For U.S. 

Senate Committee filed Form 1 at the same date. Mr. Williams filed his Statement of Candidacy 

and authorized a principal campaign committee specifically as a candidate for the anticipated 

2010 U.S. Senate special election, and not as a candidate for the regularly-scheduled 2012 

election. At the time, it was widely mmored that Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison would resign 

from the Senate to mn for Govemor. This seat was otherwise not up for election until 2012. 

(Texas' other U.S. Senate seat is not subject to election until 2014.) Thus, Mr. Williams 

declared his intention to mn for a seat that many believed would be vacated and filled in 2010 by 

special election. 

The Committee raised funds in connection with this anticipated 2010 special election, 

pursuant to guidance issued by the Commission. See Advisory Opinion 2009-15 (Bill White For 

Texas) (authorizing funds to be raised for an anticipated special election). The Conunittee 

solicited and received contributions for the 2010 special primary election, 2010 special mn-off 

election, and 2010 special general election. 

We note that the "altemative" designation referenced in Question #2 of Advisory Opinion 

2009-15 was unnecessary for the Committee because Mr. Williams actually declared himself a 

candidate for election in 2010, as opposed to Mr. White, whose FEC Form 2 indicated that he 

was a 2012 candidate. Mr. White's campaign committee subsequently received termination 

approval from the Commission on November 12, 2010, which very strongly suggests that Mr. 

White was never actually a 2012 candidate. 

From early December 2009 through March 31,2010, Mr. Williams and the Committee 

undertook efforts to prepare for a 2010 special election. This included raising and spending 

funds designated for the 2010 special primary election. On March 31, 2010, Senator Hutchison 

announced that she would not resign her Senate seat. 

Attachment 1, Page 2 of 14 
Correspondence and Communications With Reports Analysis Division 

The Reports Analysis Division sent Requests For Additional Information to the 

Committee on May 6, 2011 ^ and June 17, 2011. See attached. Both requests indicated: 

Your committee has reported receipt of contributions designated for the 2010 Primary 

and Runoff, elections that did not occur. Within sixty (60) days of the announcement on 

April 1, 2010 that this election would not be held, contributions designated for this 

election had to be refimded to the contributors or redesignated to another election. (11 

CFR § 110.1(b)(3); Advisory Opinions 2009-15 and 1992-15) 

The Committee responded in writing by letter dated July 22, 2011. See attached. 

Roughly seven months later, on Febmary 9, 2012, Mr. Josefiak was contacted by Ms. loffe, as 

noted on the first page of this letter. Ms. loffe, who was at all times helpful and pleasant, 

informed us that RAD had conferred with the Office of General Counsel (pursuant to Directive 

69), and OGC's position is that the language in Question #4 of Advisory Opinion 2009-15 

indicates that all contributions designated for a special election that does not occur must be 

refunded or redesignated in writing. In other words, according to staff, while fiinds may be 

raised for an anticipated special election, no funds may actually be spent in connection with such 

an election until it becomes certain that the election will actually occur. A committee that spends 

funds "prematurely" does so at its own risk. Ms. loffe acknowledged that neither RAD nor OGC 

could point to any specific negative authority on this point, but both sections still conclude that 

the funds at issue must be refunded or redesignated. (We have not received any written materials 

documenting OGC's position in response to RAD's inquiry. If that position includes any 

nuances or distinctions that we have omitted, we were not aware of them as of the date of this 

letter.) 

It is our understanding that RAD is prepared to refer this matter to OGC for enforcement 

consideration. We informed Ms. loffe on Febmary 13, 2012, that we would be submitting this 

request to the Commissioners in the coming days, and that it was our hope that RAD would stay 

any such referral pending the outcome of this request. On Febmary 14, Ms. loffe indicated via email that RAD would in fact stay their referral in light of this request. 

Thus, based on our correspondence and communications with RAD, we believe that our 

communications with Ms. loffe on Febmary 9 and Febmary 10 constitute notification to the 

Committee of legal guidance prepared by OGC at the request of RAD recommending corrective 

action. After conferring with OGC, RAD's view is that the Committee is obligated to refund or 

redesignate the contributions in question. Accordingly, the legal question at issue is ripe for 

Commission consideration pursuant to Notice 2011-11. 

The May 6 RFAI was subsequently removed from the public record. 

Attachment 1, Page 3 of 14 
Analysis of the Question Presented 

As the Commissioners are presumably aware, it is common practice for candidates (or 

potential candidates) to spend funds in anticipation of a special election. While the legal 

question may be novel to the Commission, the actual underlying practice is not. This practice is 

masked to a large extent because incumbent officeholders have the ability to raise and spend 

funds with an anticipated special election in mind, while simply attributing that activity on their 

FEC reports to their next upcoming, regularly scheduled election. If and when the special is 

called, they simply file a few amendments and proceed. 

However, when a non-incumbent engages in the same activity, he or she must choose one 

of two options: 

(1) declare as a candidate for an election that has not yet been called, and risk 

Commission inquiries should that election not occur; or 

(2) declare as a candidate for the next regularly scheduled election for that seat, raise 

funds as set forth in AO 2009-15, and in the event the special election never 

occurs, simply report your efforts as having been in connection with the next 

regularly scheduled election. 

While the Commission may not have specifically addressed this question in the past, 

prior matters suggest that anticipatory special election spending has at least been contemplated. 

For example, the facts set forth in Advisory Opinion 2006-22 (Wallace) included pre-special 

election spending with no Commission suggestion that this might be impermissible. 

There are, in fact, situations addressed in Commission materials in which a candidate is 

permitted to raise and spend funds in connection with an election that never occurs. For example, 

some states do not hold elections if only one candidate qualifies for the ballot. In this scenario, a 

candidate is still entitled to the per election limit, and may raise and spend funds in connection 

with this phantom election up until the date that the election would have taken place. See 11 

C.F.R. § 110.10(2)-(4); Advisory Opinions 1986-21, 1986-19, 1978-65, 1978-41, 1975-09. 

Thus, there is precedent for the practice at issue here, although it apparently has never 

been specifically addressed. On a more practical level, the Commission recognized the urgency 

of preparing for the special election in Advisory Opinion 2009-15. There, the Commission 

specifically noted that: 

the likelihood of the occurrence of a special election is sufficiently real in this situation. 

Based on statements from Senator Hutchison and her agents. Mayor White is presented 

with a strong possibility that Senate Hutchison will resign before the gubematorial 

Attachment 1, Page 4 of 14 
primary or gubematorial general election as well as a certainty that she will resign by the 

end of 2010 if she is elected Govemor. 

Advisory Opinion 2009-15 (White) at 5 (emphasis added). 

Mr. Williams was not faced with a scenario in which a special election was mere 

speculation and the accumulation of funds was simply a matter of pmdence. Rather, there was a 

"sufficiently real" likelihood and a "strong possibility" that the special election would be 

conducted in a matter of months, meaning candidates did not have the luxury of sitting around 

and waiting until the special election became a certainty. It was in this context that the 

Committee spent funds that had been properly designated to the special primary election. The 

Commission should also bear in mind that even though the anticipated special election was not 

ultimately called, between mid-2009 and April 1, 2010, a special election campaign absolutely 

occurred as far as several candidates were concemed. 

In light of the language quoted above from Advisory Opinion 2009-15, we believe that it 

is entirely reasonable to conclude that the Commission did not intend to prevent individuals who 

were only candidates for the anticipated 2010 special election from actually spending funds 

raised for that special election. 

Finally, common sense would seem to dictate that if funds may be raised permissibly, 

they may also be spent permissibly. We are aware of no other set of circumstances in which 

either the Act or Commission regulations permit raising funds while simultaneously prohibiting 

the spending of any funds at all. The situation at hand is fundamentally different from 

simultaneously raising primary and general election funds and quarantining the general election 

funds until such time as it becomes known that the candidate will participate in that general 

election. (This mie is necessary to effectively enforce the per election contribution limits.) In 

the primary/general situation, the candidate always has the ability to spend primary election 

funds in connection with the primary election (even if he or she is unopposed and state law 

provides that the primary election need not be held). If the primary/general principle is applied 

here in the form of OGC's apparent position with regard to anticipated special elections, the 

candidate is left in legal limbo and unable to spend any funds at all - not even special primary 

election funds raised in connection with a special primary election. 

The principle legal citation in the Requests For Additional Information is 11 CFR § 

110.1(b)(3). That provision primarily applies to "[a] contribution designated in writing for a 

particular election, but made after that election..." (emphasis added). The provision details how 

to dispose of contributions received after an election that exceed the committee's net debts 

outstanding, and also notes that funds raised for a general election in which a candidate is not 

Attachment 1, Page 5 of 14 
participating must be refunded or redesignated. The regulation does not address anticipated 

special elections, and is therefore inapplicable under its own terms. 

As noted in our July 22,2011, written response to RAD, "the Campaign Committee made 

expenditures in connection with the anticipated 2010 [special] primary election using only the 

funds raised for, or properly applied to, the 2010 primary. No funds raised for the mn-off or the 

General Special Election were spent." 

Following Senator Hutchison's announcement on March 31, 2010, that she would not 

resign her U.S. Senate seat, Mr. Williams filed a revised Statement of Candidacy indicating that 

he was a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2012. Any funds raised after March 31, 2010, were 

designated to the 2012 elections. 

Accordingly, funds raised by the Committee from approximately December 8, 2009, 

through March 31, 2010, were designated by donors to one of the potential 2010 special 

elections (primary, mn-off, or general). A total of $43,566 remaining in the 2010 special 

election account. Of this total, $32,000 had been initially designated for the 2010 mn-off or 

general election. $23,300 of that amount was redesignated in writing to the 2012 election, and 

the remaining $8,800 was refunded to donors. Thus, all funds designated to the 2010 mn-off or 

general election were disposed of via written redesignation or refund. 

Following these refunds and redesignations, a total of $11,566 remained in the 2010 

special primarv election account. $4,004 was owed to vendors. Once the vendors were paid, 

$7,562 remained. This amount was used to repay part of the candidate's personal loan of 

$100,000 to the 2010 special primarv election. The balance in the 2010 special primary election 

account was thereby extinguished. 

The Committee was forthcoming about its fundraising and spending intentions when it 

made clear on FEC Forms 1 and 2 that it was operating in connection with the 2010 special 

election. At least one other candidate who informed the Commission of his intention to raise 

funds and mn in the 2010 special election appears to have escaped this same scmtiny simply by 

reporting that all funds raised and spent during the same time period were in connection with the 

2012 regular election. This candidate terminated in November 2010, and we think it fair to 

conclude that he was never actually a candidate for the 2012 election. This is an inequitable 

result, and if allowed stand, would provide a very clear disincentive to committees that attempt 

to accurately disclose their finances. 

We urge the Commission to clearly state that conunittees may legitimately incur 

expenses in connection with a special election that does not materialize, and that such expenses 

Attachment 1, Page 6 of 14 
do not need to be recouped and refunded or redesignated, or misleadingly attributed to a future, 

regulariy-scheduled election where the candidate was not in fact a candidate for such election. 

Conclusion 

As a final matter, it is our understanding that the Commission's Policy Statement 

provides that any Commission consideration of the legal question presented will take place either 

on written tally or in Executive Session. See 76 Fed. Reg. at 45,799 ("After the recommendation 

is circulated for a Commission vote, in the event of an objection, the matter shall be 

automatically placed on the next meeting agenda consistent with the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 

552b(g), and applicable Commission regulations, 11 CFR part 2."). If we have misinterpreted 

this language, and Commission consideration following an objection would take place in Open 

Session, please consider this request for consideration to be automatically withdrawn. 

Thank you for your assistance, and please feel free to contact us if you have any 

questions or require any additional information. 

Sincerely, 

Thomas J. Josefiak 

Michael Bayes 

Counsel to Michael Williams For U.S. 

Senate Committee 

cc: Caroline C. Hunter, Chair 

Ellen L. Weintraub, Vice Chair 

Nataliya loffe, Authorized Branch Chief, Reports Analysis Division 

Attachment I, Page 7 of 14 
Ma» 10 2011 S:50Rfi p.2 

RQ-2 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMIVIISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

RICHARD HOWELL COLLINS, TREASURER 

MICHAEL WILLIAMS FOR US SENATE 

COMMITTEE 

May 6, 2011 

AUSTIN. TX 78767 ^"^P**"*" 

06/10/2011 

IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: C00457960 

REFERENCE: OCTOBER QUARTERLY REPORT (07/01/2010 - 09/30/2010) 

Dear Treasurer: 

This letter is prompted by the Commission's preliminary review of the report(s) 

referenced above. This notice requests information essential to full public disclosui^ of 

your federal election campaign finances. An adequate response must be received at 

the Senate Public Records Office by tbe response date noted above. Failure to 

adequately respond by the response date noted above could result in an audit or 

enforcement action. Additional information is needed for the following l item(s): 

- Your committee has reported receipt of contributions designated for the 2010 

Special Primary Election for Texas Senate, an election that did not occur. 

Within sixty (60) days of the announcement on April 1, 2010 that this election 

would not be held, contributions designated for this election had to be refunded 

to the contributors or redesignated to anochei* election (11 CFR § 110.1(bX3); 

Advisoi7 Opinions 2009-15 and 1992-15). 

To redesignate a contribution, the committee must have obtained signed 

written documentation from the contributor authorizing the redesignation of 

tlie conlribution(s) for another election, provided tliat ihe new designation did 

not exceed the limitations on contributions made with respect to that election. 

A contribution could only be redesignated to a previous election to the extent 

that the contribution did not exceed net debts outstanding for that election. (11 

CFR § 110.1(bX3Xi) and (5XiiXC)) 

If any of the apparent 2010 Special Primary Election contributions in question 

were incompletely or incorrectly disclosed, you must amend your original 

report(s) with the clarifying information. 

Please inform the Commission of your corrective action immediately in writing 

and provide photocopies of any refund checks. Refunds are reported on Line 

Attachment 1, Page 8 of 14 
Mad la 2011 9:50RN p.3 

MICHAEL WILLIAMS FOR US SENATE COMMITTEE 

Page 2 of2 

20 ofthe Detailed Summary Page and on a supporting Schedule B ofthe report 

covering the period in which they are made. (11 CFR § 104.8(d)(4)) 

Please amend your report(s) to disclose what action will be taken in regard to 

these 2010 Special Primary Eiection contributions received by your committee. 

Although the Commission may take further legal action, prompt action by you 

to refund these contributions will be taken into consideration. 

Please note, you will not receive an additional notice rrom the Commission on this 

matter. Adequate responses must be received by the Commtssion on or before the due 

date noted above to be taken into consideration in determining whether audit action 

will be initiated. Failure to comply with the provisions of the Act may also result in an 

enforcement action against the committee. Any response submitted by your committee 

will be placed on the public record and will be considered by the Commission prior to 

taking enforcement action. Requests for extensions of time in which to respond will 

not be considered. 

A written response or an amendment to your original report(s) correcting the above 

problems should be filed with the Senate Public Records Office. Please contact the 

Senate Public Records Office at (202) 224-0322 for instructions on how and where to 

file an amendment. If you should have any questions regarding this matter or wish to 

verify the adequacy of your response, please contact me on our toll-free number (800) 

424-9530 (at the prompt press 5 to reach the Reports Analysis Division) or my local 

number (202)694-1166. 

Sincerely, 

Bradley Matheson 

Senior Campaign Finance Analyst 

Reports Analysis Division 

Attachment 1, Page 9 of 14 
I

Image# 11330010727 

RQ-2 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20463 

June 17, 2011 

RICHARD HOWELL COLLINS. TREASURER 

MICHAEL WILLIAMS FOR US SENATE 

COMMITTEE 

PO BOX 717 

AUSTIN, TX 78767 Response Due Date 

07/22/2011 

IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: C00457960 

REFERENCE: AMENDED JULY QUARTERLY REPORT (04/01/2010 - 06/30/2010), 

RECEIVED 09/30/2010 

Dear Treasurer: 

This letter is prompted by the Commission's preliminary review of the report(s) 

referenced above. This notice requests information essential to full public disclosure of 

your federal election campaign finances. An adequate response must be received at 

the Senate Public Records Office by the response date noted above. Failure to 

adequately respond by the response date noted above could result in an audit or 

enforcement action. Additional information is needed for the following 1 item(s): 

- Your committee has reported receipt of contributions designated for the 2010 

Primary and Runoff, elections that did not occur. Within sixty (60) days of the 

announcement on April 1, 2010 that this election would not be held, 

contributions designated for this election had to be refunded to the contributors 

or redesignated to another election. (11 CFR § 110.1(b)(3); Advisory Opinions 

2009-15 and 1992-15) 

To redesignate a contribution, the committee must have obtained signed 

written documentation from the contributor authorizing the redesignation of 

the contribution(s) for another election, provided that the new designation did 

not exceed the limitations on contributions made with respect to that election. 

A contribution could only be redesignated to a previous election to the extent 

that the contribution did not exceed net debts outstanding for that election. (11 

CFR § 110.1(b)(3)(i) and (5)(iiXC)) 

If any of the apparent 2010 Primary or Runoff contributions in question were 

incompletely or incorrectly disclosed, you must amend your original report(s) 

with the clarifying information. 

Please inform the Commission of your corrective action immediately in writing 

Attachment 1, Page 10 of 14 
Image# 11330010728 

MICHAEL WILLIAMS FOR US SENATE COMMITTEE 

Page 2 of2 

and provide photocopies of any refund checks. Refunds are reported on Line 

20 of the Detailed Summary Page and on a supporting Schedule B of the report 

covering the period in which they are made. (11 CFR § 104.8(d)(4)) 

Please amend your report(s) to disclose what action will be taken in regard to 

these 2010 Primary and Runoff contributions received by your committee. 

Although the Commission may take further legal action, prompt action by you 

to refund these contributions will be taken into consideration. 

Please note, you will not receive an additional notice from the Commission on this 

matter. Adequate responses must be received by the Commission on or before the due 

date noted above to be taken into consideration in determining whether audit action 

will be initiated. Failure to comply with the provisions ofthe Act may also result in an 

enforcement action against the committee. Any response submitted by your committee 

will be placed on the public record and will be considered by the Commission prior to 

taking enforcement action. Requests for extensions of time in which to respond will 

not be considered. 

A written response or an amendment to your original report(s) correcting the above 

problems should be filed with the Senate Public Records Office. Please contact the 

Senate Public Records Office at (202) 224-0322 for instructions on how and where to 

file an amendment. If you should have any questions regarding this matter or wish to 

verify the adequacy of your response, please contact me on our toll-free number (800) 

424-9530 (at the prompt press 5 to reach the Reports Analysis Division) or my local 

number (202) 694-1166. 

Sincerely, 

Bradley Matheson 

Senior Campaign Finance Analyst 

Reports Analysis Division 

Attachment 1, Page 11 of 14 
HOLTZMANVOGE L PLLC 

4.*» .Noiih Hill Dn^•c 

Suite 100 

W.-uienton.VAJOlS«) 

P/54O-.U1-880S 

f/>40-.Ul-SS0?) 

July 22, 2011 

Bradley Matheson 

Senior Campaign Finance Analyst 

Reports Analysis Division 

Federal Election Commission 

999 E Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20463 

Re: Michael Williams For US Senate Committee (Currently registered as Michael 

Williams For Congress Committee); 2010 July Quarterly Report 

Dear Mr. Matheson, 

This letter is submitted by the undersigned counsel on behalf of Michael Williams For 

US Senate Committee/ Michael Williams For Congress Committee (C00457960) in response to 

your Request For Additional Information (RFAI) dated June 17, 2011, regarding the 

Committee's 2010 July Quarterly Report. 

The RFAI states, "Your committee reported receipt of contributions designated for the 

2010 Primary and Runoff, elections that did not occur." You assert that "[w]ithin 60 days ofthe 

announcement on April 1, 2010 that this election would not be held, contributions designated for 

this election had to be refunded to the contributors or redesignated to another election," citing 11 

CFR 110.1(b)(3) and Advisory Opinions 2009-15 and 1992-15. 

We respectfully submit, based on our understanding of the appropriate regulatory 

provisions, the Committee has complied with the Commission's redesignation and refund 

requirements in conjunction with the Committee's 2010 Senate activity. 

Michael Williams filed as a US Senate candidate on December 16, 2008 for the much 

anticipated and expected Special Election for the seat of Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, 

who publicly indicated that she would likely resign her Senate seat to mn for Texas Govemor in 

2010. However, unlike other candidates seeking her seat, including the requestor in Advisory 

Opinion 2009-15, Mr. Williams filed only as a candidate for the expected 2010 Senate race. 

Attachment 1, Page 12 of 14 
Others, including the requestor in Advisory Opinion 2009-15, filed instead as a candidate for the 

2012 Senate election. 

Mr. Williams' principle campaign committee solicited and raised funds solely for the 

2010 election and did not solicit or raise any contributions for the 2012 election. During this 

period, Mr. Williams was never a candidate for election in 2012, and accordingly raised no funds 

for that election. As a result, his 2010 campaign committee began raising contributions that were 

either specifically designated for the 2010 primary or non-specifically designated for the "next 

upcoming election," consistent with Commission Regulations and Commission Advisory 

Opinions, and properly applied by the campaign to the anticipated 2010 primary. 

The 2010 campaign also solicited and received designated contributions for a potential 

2010 mn-off election, since there were multiple candidates and under Texas law a candidate is 

required to win a majority of the vote (50% plus I and not simply a plurality) in order to win the 

primary nomination. Consistent with Commission Regulations and Advisory Opinions, these 

mn-off funds remained segregated from the 2010 primary funds and were not spent. 

The Committee also solicited and received contributions designated for the 2010 General 

Special Election, and segregated those funds in the same manner as the mn-off contributions. 

During the time before the April 1, 2010 announcement, the Campaign Committee made 

expenditures in connection with the anticipated 2010 primary election using only the funds 

raised for, or properly applied to, the 2010 primary. No funds raised for the mn-off or the 

General Special Election were spent. 

When Senator Hutchison announced on April 1, 2010, that she would not resign, meaning 

there would be no 2010 Special Election, Mr. Williams filed a revised Statement of Candidacy 

indicating that he was now a candidate for the 2012 Senate election. All contributions received 

from this point on were designated for the Senate primary of 2012 and were reported as such. 

As of April 1, 2010 $43,566 remained in the 2010 Committee account, of which $32,000 

had been designated for the 2010 mn-off or general special election. Of that latter total, $23,200 

was appropriately redesignated in writing by contributors for the 2012 election. An additional 

$8,800 was refunded to donors. These transactions were reported on the Committee's July 2010 

Quarterly Report. After these redesignations/refunds were made, a balance of $11,566 remained 

in the 2010 primary account. However, on April I, the Committee also had outstanding 

obligations in the amount of $4,004 that had been incurred during the 2010 primary campaign. 

This 2010 primary debt was reported on Schedule D of the July 2010 Quarterly Report. 

In addition, the campaign carried an outstanding loan from the candidate in the amount of 

$ 100,000. This loan was incurred in connection with the 2010 primary election. Any funds 

Attachment 1, Page 13 of 14 
remaining from the 2010 primary election may therefore be used to satisfy these outstanding 

obligations incurred in connection with that same election. 

As of June 15,2011, Michael Williams amended his Statement of Candidacy to reflect 

that he was no longer a candidate for the US Senate in 2012, but rather, is now a 2010 candidate 

for the US House of Representatives for the newly created 33''' Congressional District in Texas. 

Mr. Williams' principal campaign committee's Statement of Organization was amended 

accordingly, reflecting the committee's name change to "Michael Williams For Congress." 

To summarize, as a candidate for US Senate for the 2010 Special Election in Texas, the 

2010 Michael Williams For Senate Committee raised and spent funds consistent with 

Commission Regulations and Advisory Opinions. As a candidate for the 2012 Senate race, the 

Michael Williams for Senate Committee appropriately secured redesignations or refunded 

contributions remaining in the 2010 account as of the April 1, 2010 announcement. These 

redesignations and refunds were duly reported by the Committee on its July 2010 Quarterly 

Report. 

The RFAI indicates that the Committee's response to this RFAI should be filed with the 

Senate Public Records Office. Because the Committee is now the principal campaign for a US 

House candidate, this response is being filed directly with the Federal Election Commission. 

If you have any additional questions or need further clarification, please contact us. 

Sincerely, 

Thomas J. Josefiak 

Michael Bayes 

Counsel to Michael Williams For US 

Senate/ Michael Williams For Congress 

Attachment I, Page 14 of 14 
Federal Election Commission 

ENVELOPE REPLACEMENT PAGE FOR INCOMING DOCUMENTS 

The FEC added this page to the end of this filing to indicate how it was received. 

Date of Receipt 

Hand Delivered 

Postmarked 

USPS First Class Mail 

Postmarked (R/C) 

USPS Registered/Certified 

Postmarked 

USPS Priority Mail 

Delivery ConfirmationTM or Signature ConfirmationTM Label | 

Postmarked 

USPS Express Mail 

Postmark Illegible 

No Postmark 

Sh pping Date 

Overnight Delivery Service (Specify): •L \5 lo\3 

^eo Next Business Day Delivery Ex 

Date of Receipt 

Received from House Records & Registration Office 

Date of Receipt 

Received from Senate Public Records Office 

Date of Receipt 

Received from Electronic Filing Office 

Date of Receipt or Postmarked 

Other (Specify)i^ 

?1 21 201^ 

PREPARER DATE PREPARED 

(3/2005)